Udip Bhagat v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59011 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2025 Thana- PANJWARA District- Banka ====================================================== Udip Bhagat, S/o Late Suresh Pd. Bhagat, R/o Village- Daliya, P.S.- Bounsi, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Panjwara P.S. Case No. 45 of 2025 dated 15.04.2025 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b), (ii)(B)/22(b) of N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The allegation is of recovery of 6.9 kg. Ganja from a motorcycle which belongs to the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the F.I.R., 6.9 kg. Ganja has been recovered which was kept in a bag on a motorcycle. In fact, nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The said quantity is more

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59011 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/2 than small quantity but less than commercial quantity. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 16.04.2025 having two criminal cases against him. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and stated that the said seized articles have been recovered from a motorcycle which belongs to the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has antecedent of similar nature under N.D.P.S. Act. As such, the petitioner is not entitled for regular bail.

6. Considering the fact that the said seized articles have been recovered from the petitioner's motorcycle as also the petitioner has criminal antecedent of similar nature, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner stands rejected.

8. The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and take all endeavour to conclude the trial at the earliest, preferably, within a period of nine (9) months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order. (Khatim Reza, J) premchand/- U T