Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26034/2016dismissed

Sohail @ Md. Suhel v. The State Of Bihar

2017-02-27Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26034 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -93 Year- 2016 Thana -UDWANTNAGAR District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Sohail @ Md. Suhel, S/o Md. Ashphak, resident of village- Garahani, P.S.- Charpokhri, District- Bhojpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shri Prakash Srivastava For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Chandrasen Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 27-02-2017 Heard the parties.

This application is for grant of bail in connection with Udwant Nagar P.S.Case No.93 of 2016 for the offence under Sections 20 (b) (ii) and Section 22 (C ) of N.D.P.S. Act. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner rather it is recovered from an Alto Car and a Bolero Car and from the Alto Car, 4.750 Kg. Ganja was recovered and he is in custody since 01.02.2016 and from perusal of the case diary, it appears that two vehicles were intercepted- one Alto Car and one Bolero Car and from the Bolero Car a huge quantity of Ganja (about 32 kg) was recovered and about 4.750 Kg. Ganja was recovered from the Alto Car and the petitioner had nothing to do with the seized Ganja.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26034 of 2016 (4) dt.27-02-2017 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides. In view of recovery of a huge quantity of Ganja, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner as all of accused persons, including the petitioner, were aware of the fact about transmitting of Ganja in huge quantity, however considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 01.02.2016, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and try to conclude it within a period of six months. With the aforesaid observation, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U