Ajeet Kumar v. The Union Of India Through The Deputy Director, Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18085 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -16 Year- 2017 Thana -D.R.I District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Ajeet Kumar S/o Sri Mantun Singh, R/o Village- Nepura, Post OfficeParbatti, P.S.- Kashichak, District- Nawada. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Deputy Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No-2 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. S.D Sanjay (Addl. Soc. Gen.) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20, 23, 35 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The petitioner is driver of the truck. From the chamber whereof huge quantity of Ganja was recovered. The recovery is on the disclosure of the petitioner. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in fact the owner of the truck has got such criminal antecedent and he was involved in the smuggling of Ganja. The petitioner was simply a carrier without knowledge that what was hidden in the chamber of the vehicle. The petitioner is in custody since 09.07.2017. He has got no criminal antecedent.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18085 of 2018 (6) dt.19-06-2018 2/2 Considering the nature of allegation and nature of material available on the record, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present in connection with Special Case No. 93 of 2017 arising out of Complaint Case bearing No. F. No. DRI/LZU/PRU/718(II) ENQ 16 of 2017 pending in the court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-III-cum-Special Judge C.B.I.-II, Patna.

Hence, prayer for bail is refused.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. This order has been passed in presence of learned counsel appearing for the Union of India who shall ensure production of the prosecution witnesses within the aforesaid period, failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Kundan/- U T