Shyam Sundar Kumar @ Shyam Kumar @ Nitish Kumar @ Pauwa v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37919 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-646 Year-2022 Thana- FORBESGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Shyam Sundar Kumar @ Shyam Kumar @ Nitish Kumar @ Pauwa S/O Triveni Yadav R/O Koriyapatti, Ward No.- 12, P.S.- Jadia, Dist.- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prafull Chandra Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2025 Heard Mr.Prafull Chandra Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Md. Matloob Rab, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 25.06.2022 in connection with Forbesganj P.S. Case No. 646 of 2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8/20(b)(ii)(c) of N.D.P.S. Act and Sections 25(1-b) A/26/35 of Arms Act.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was twice rejected vide orders dated 06.10.2023 and 05.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos.19429 of 2023 and 33645 of 2024. Thereafter, the petitioner has again moved before this Court in Cr.Misc. No.22947 of 2025 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 11.04.2025 with liberty to move

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37919 of 2025(2) dt.02-07-2025 2/2 before the learned Trial Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been made from the vehicle in question.

5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the recovered contraband is more than the commercial quantity and apart from that, it appears from the impugned order that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined.

9. In view of the finding in the impugned order by the learned court below, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Forbesganj P.S. Case No. 646 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Araria.

10. Prayer is refused.

11. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T