Kishore Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.52338 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-208 Year-2021 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- East Champaran ====================================================== Kishore Ram S/O Sri Sudhan Ram R/O Village- Dewaria, P.S.- Pokharia, District- Parsa (Nepal) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Union of India New Delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur No.2, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Murli Dhar, APP For the Union of India : Mr. Awadesh Kumar Pandey, Senior Panel Lawyer ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as learned Senior Panel Lawyer Mr. Awadesh Kumar Pandey, for the Union of India. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Complain Unit Case No. VIII (10)/Cus/Seiz/NDPS RXL/2020-21/208 registered for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(c), 23 and 29 of NDPS Act.

As per the prosecution, the police personnel acting upon a secret information raided the alleged place and apprehended this petitioner and from his possession narcotic material suspected to be Charas weighing 12 Kilograms was recovered. The main submissions advanced by learned counsel Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur No. 2, appearing for the petitioner are that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.52338 of 2022(3) dt.14-02-2023 2/2 the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 18.01.2021 and while making the search and seizure of the alleged contraband the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act were not followed by the concerned police officials and the charges have been framed against the petitioner on 19.02.2021 but the trial is still running against the petitioner. Further submission is that the petitioner has fair and clean antecedent.

Learned APP Mr. Murli Dhar, appearing for the State and learned counsel Mr. Awadesh Kumar Pandey, appearing for the Union of India have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Having considered the huge quantity of contraband namely, Charas allegedly recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to accept the petitioner's prayer for bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial court is directed to take steps to conclude the trial of the petitioner at the earliest, preferably within one year from the date of this order.

(Shailendra Singh, J.) maynaz/- U T