Jahnaj Khatoon @ Jahnaj Khatun v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34923 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2024 Thana- KISHANGANJ District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Jahnaj Khatoon @ Jahnaj Khatun Wife of Muhammad Rahman @ Rahman Ansari @ Subodh Prasad R/O Village Khagra Machchmara Ward No 33 PS Kishanganj Distt kishanganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kishanganj P.S. Case No. 302 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 318(4), 336(3) & 336(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8(c) & 21(c) of the NDPS Act. Earlier vide order dated 24-10-2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 76030 of 2024 regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court.

3.

Prosecution case pertains to recovery of 261.660 gram smack as also Rs. 1,42,000/-.

4.

It has been mainly submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 10-08-2024 and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34923 of 2025(2) dt.19-06-2025 2/2 petitioner is a lady. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that bail of the petitioner was earlier decided on merit and she does not deserve the privilege of bail. 6.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court does not find any fresh ground to reconsider the matter, which is already decided by this Court on merit. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is once again rejected.

7.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T