Pradip Kumar Sah @ Pappu Sah v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 17996 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2014 Thana- Mirganj District- Purnia ====================================================== Pradip Kumar Sah @ Pappu Sah, S/o Sri Satish Chandra Sah, Resident of Village- Kajra, P.O.- Rangpura, P.S.- Mirganj, District- Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Police Sub Inspector, P.S.- Mirganj, District- Purnea. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Sri N.K.Agrawal, Sr.Adv.

Mr. Dhananjaya Nath Tiwari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3.

11-04-2018 Heard Sri N.K.Agrawal, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Dhananjay Nath Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. This is second attempt for grant of bail on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody since 10th of November, 2014 in Special Case No. 19 of 2014 (arising out of Mirganj P.S. Case No. 110 of 2014) registered for offence under Sections 20/20(B)IIC/22/23/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Sections 420 & 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Earlier, the prayer for bail of petitioner was rejected on 09-12-2015, vide Cr. Misc. No. 52601 of 2015. In this case, by order dated 28-03-2018, a report was

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17996 of 2018(3) dt.11-04-2018 2/2 called for from the court below regarding status of the case, which has been received and kept at flag 'R'. The report contained in letter no. 250/2018 dated 06-04-2018 makes it clear that in the case, prosecution evidence has already been closed and the case was fixed for recording statement of accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.

Considering the fact that trial is at the fag end, there is no reason to review my earlier order.

The prayer for bail again stands rejected with an observation that the learned Trial Judge may take appropriate step so that the case may come to its logical end without unnecessary delay.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) anay U T