Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49246/2024rejected

Taslimuddin v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-23Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49246 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2024 Thana- DIGHALBANK District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Taslimuddin S/O Md. Ibrahim R/O Kutwabhita (Naya Tola), P.S- Dighalbank, Distt.- Kishanganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for an offence punishable under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, 28 grams of contraband article being brown sugar has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and the there was recovery of 87,700/- of Nepali currency and Rs.15,500/- of Indian currency from the conscious possession of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case and he has no concern with the seized article and the provision of Section 50

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49246 of 2024(2) dt.23-07-2024 2/2 of the NDPS Act has not been followed during the search. Petitioner has got clean antecedent and he is in custody since 28.04.2024.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

7. On perusal of the first information report and impugned order dated 12.06.2024, it appears that 28 grams of brown sugar was recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, about 88,000/- cash of Nepali currency as well as about Rs. 15,500/-, was recovered. Considering the fact that there was recovery of brown sugar as well as huge quantity of cash in foreign currency as well as in Indian currency, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

9. However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of framing of charge and if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, then the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T