Patna High CourtCR. MISC./60030/2023dismissed

Sonu Kumar Suman v. The State Of Bihar

2023-09-08Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No 60030 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2021 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== SONU KUMAR SUMAN S/O- LATE KAMESHWAR PRASAD YADAV Village- Shaligrami Ps- Sahebpur Kamal Dist- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Sujit Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

CORAM:

HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 08-09-2023 Heard the parties.

2 The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with S Kamal PS Case No 288 of 2021 dated 03.12.2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 120B/414 of Indian Penal Code, Sections 8(C), 21 (C), 25, 35 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and Sections 25 (1-b) a, 26, 35 of Arms Act.

3 As per the prosecution story, the allegation is that upon information that the petitioner is doing the business of narcotic drugs, house raided and besides other accused persons, this petitioner was also apprehended and allegation is that from this petitioner, total 2.346 Kgs smack recovered/seized. Accordingly, the FIR.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60030 of 2023(2) dt.08-09-2023 2/2 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to village rivalry, the petitioner has been implicated along with two drug peddlers, namely, Nitesh Kumar @ Amrit and Nikhil Kumar.

5 Learned APP, on the other hand, points out that not only from the pocket of the petitioner but also from the bed and other places, there are recoveries which comes to 2.346 Kgs and it is much above the commercial quantity.

6 Taking into account the submissions, put forward by the parties, for the present, this Court is not inclined to extend the petitioner the privilege of bail.

7 In view of the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 04.12.2021 (paragraph 32 of the petition), it is high time that the trial Court should take the trial to its logical conclusion and in any case conclude the same within a period of nine months from today.

8 With the aforesaid observations, this application is dismissed.

(Rajiv Roy, J) M.E.H./- U T