Munna Rai v. The Union Of India Through Intelligence Officer, Patna Zonal Unit, Narcotic Control Bureau,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54118 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2016 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Patna ====================================================== MUNNA RAI Son of Late Surendar Ray Resident of Village- Jagdishpur, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India through Intelligence Officer, Patna Zonal Unit, Narcotic Control Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Anuj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.S.D. Sanjay ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL ORDER 04-12-2019 Instant petition under Sections 439 and 440 of Criminal Procedure Code has been moved for grant of bail in Special Case No. 55 of 2016 arising out of Complaint Bearing No. NCB/PZU/V/05/2016 under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Petitioner is in custody since 06.08.2016 in relation to an offence allegedly committed in the year 2016. Under the instructions, Mr. S.D.Sanjay, learned Addl. Solicitor General, states that examination of prosecution witnesses is complete so also the statement of the accused persons recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He also invites attention of this Court of the petitioner having approached the Hon'ble Apex Court assailing the earlier order of rejection dated 06.02.2019 passed by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 71369 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54118 of 2019(3) dt.04-12-2019 2/2 2018, factum of passing of such an order, subsequently placed on record by way of supplementary affidavit only when the allegation of concealment was taken.
Having given thoughtful consideration to the entire attending facts and circumstances, including that two of the coaccused already stand enlarged on bail, at this stage, I am not inclined to grant privilege of bail, particularly when more than 80 Kg of contraband substance is alleged to have been recovered from a car in which the petitioner was found sitting. This Court may not be understood to have expressed any opinion with regard to the bail already granted to the other two co-accused persons.
Prima facie, considering the nature and seriousness of the crime, the punishment prescribed being severe and finding the accused not to have rebutted the prosecution case and the statutory presumption in accordance with law, no ground for grant of bail is made out.
As such this application is dismissed.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ) sujit/- U T