Patna High CourtCR. MISC./58931/2023bail rejected

Ramesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-11-03Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58931 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2021 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Gaya ====================================================== Ramesh Kumar Son Of Chandeshar Rai Vill. Meerampur, Ps- Raghopur, DistVaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. P.N Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Vijay Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 03-11-2023

1. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with Excise (N.D.P.S) Case no. 47 of 2021 registered under sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the N.D.P.S Act.

3. The earlier application for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 18.1.2023 (Annexure-1) passed in Cr. Misc. no.21547 of 2022.

4. As per the prosecution case, 500 kgs of ganja was recovered from a truck owned by this petitioner.

5. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that no incriminating article has been recovered from the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58931 of 2023(4) dt.03-11-2023 2/2 petitioner's possession. He has been falsely implicated in the case only on the ground that the incriminating article as mentioned in the F.I.R was recovered from the vehicle of which he is the registered owner. He was not caught at the place of occurrence. He is in custody since 12.9.2021 and there is no chance of the trial concluding in the near future as even charge has not been framed.

6. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State.

7. A report was called for from the learned trial Court. As per the report received as contained in letter dated 30.9.2023, it transpires that the case is running on the stage of hearing on the point of charge.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

9. In the facts of the case, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months or after framing of charge, whichever is later.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U T