Patna High CourtCR. MISC./59585/2024dismissed

Abdullah v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-16Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59585 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2024 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan ====================================================== Abdullah Son of Md. Idrish @ Idrish Resident of Village - Deviyapur, P.S. - Mankapur, District - Gonda (U.P.) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 20/22 of the NDPS Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.01.2024, informant got a secret informant that the truck bearing

4. On 23.01.2024 the informant got secret information that Truck bearing Registration. No. ASO1LC-1035 was about to pass through Pachrukhi Bypass and 'ganja' was kept hidden in the cabin of the truck. On this information, the said truck was intercepted. After seeing the police, two persons were tried to flee away but they were apprehended. Both persons are identified as Ramesh Kumar Verma and Abdullah. Upon search

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59585 of 2024(5) dt.16-01-2025 2/2 from the said truck, 400 K.G. of 'ganja' was recovered. Accordingly, the FIR.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is simply a co-driver having no criminal antecedent. He is in custody since 24.01.2024.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail stating that recovered 400 K.G. 'ganja' like substance is more than the commercial quantity. As such, he does not deserve bail.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend him the privilge of bail which is accordingly, rejected with liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months.

8. However, the Trial Court is hereby directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T