Asfak Hussain v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.18284 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2017 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna ====================================================== Asfak Hussain son of late Aftab Hussain resident of village - Salliya, P.O. Kanchanpur, P.S. & Tahsil - Lakshmipur, District - Kheri (Uttar Pradesh). ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Suraj Narain Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Union of India :
Mr. S.D. Sanjay, A.S.G.
For the State :
Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
Petitioner, already in custody, seeks bail in connection with DRI F No. DRI/LZU/PRU/718(II) Enq-13/2017, giving rise to Special Case No.09/2017/CIS NDPS No.07 of 2017 registered under Sections 20(b), 23, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. Allegation in brief is that receiving secret information that a truck was coming from Assam, it was checked by the police and 272 Kgs. of Ganja and paraffin wax were recovered from the truck of which the petitioner is said to be the cleaner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was duly engaged as cleaner, he had no knowledge of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18284 of 2018(5) dt.10-07-2018 2/2 carrying narcotics; whereas the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India submits that the petitioner was also in the truck and huge quantity of Ganja was being carried, the trial is proceeding and two witnesses have been examined. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in particular the recovery of huge quantity of Ganja, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and preferably conclude the same within a year. If the trial is not concluded by the stipulated period, the petitioner may renew his prayer of bail.
(Arun Kumar, J) S.KUMAR/- U T