Patna High CourtCR. MISC./33790/2015rejected

Suresh Kumar @ Suresh Rai v. The State Of Bihar Through Economic Offence Unit

2015-08-12Mr. Justice Ashwani Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.33790 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -20 Year- 2014 Thana -ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BIHAR DistrictPATNA ====================================================== Suresh Kumar @ Suresh Rai son of Prabhu Rai, resident of villageSabalpur Nawal Tola, P.S. Sonepur, District- Chapra. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through Economic Offence Unit .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mr.V N P Sinha, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Vijay Anand, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Economic Offence Unit.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Economic Offence P.S. Case No.20 of 2014 registered under sections 414, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 472 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 23 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

The prayer of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court on 22nd September, 2014 in Cr. Misc. No.33629 of 2014. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date charges have not been framed and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded in near future. On the other hand, learned Special

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.33790 of 2015 (3) dt.12-08-2015 2/2 Public Prosecutor for the Economic Offence Unit submits that the case is fixed for framing of charge and once charges are framed evidence would be promptly led before the trial court. In view of the specific bar prescribed under section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible preferably within one year from the date of framing of charge.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- U T