Patna High CourtCR. MISC./43601/2025dismissed

Pyarelal Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-17Mr. Justice Praveen Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43601 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2007 Thana- N.C.B (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL) District- East Champaran ====================================================== Pyarelal Prasad S/O Vishwanath Prasad R/O 09, Ward no. 10, Pandey Tola, Lalgarh, West Champaran.- 845438 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Union Of India India 3.

B.K. Choudhary S/O Not Known Inspector Customs (P), Division Motihari ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP For the Customs :

Mr. Anshuman Singh Sr. SC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the Customs.

2. The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 01.04.2013 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, NDPS, Motihari, in connection with NDPS Case No. 32 of 2007 arising out of Official Complaint Case No. 09 of 2007, whereby process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 84 of the BNSS) has been issued against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 29, 20(b) (ii)(c) and 23 of the NDPS Act.

3. The petitioner has approached this Court in the year

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43601 of 2025(3) dt.17-04-2026 2/2 2025 challenging the order taking cognizance, which was passed in the year 2013.

4. It is evident that there is an inordinate and unexplained delay of more than a decade in approaching this Court. The petitioner has failed to furnish any plausible or satisfactory explanation for such extraordinary delay. No material has been placed on record to explain or justify the prolonged inaction on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court.

5. In the absence of any convincing explanation for the gross delay, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present application. Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

(Praveen Kumar, J) Jyoti/- U T