Nilesh Kumar Dangi v. The Union Of India Through Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4764 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2022 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna ====================================================== NILESH KUMAR DANGI Son of Shri Mahendra Prasad Dangi R/VChiridiri, P.O.- Kanhachatti, P.S.- Rajpur, District- Chatra, PIN- 825401, Jharkhand ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union of India through Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. K.N. Chaubey, Sr. Adv.

:

Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.

For the DRI :

Mr. Ranvir Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. K.N. Singh (A.S.G) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 06-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 21, 25, 29, 43(b) and 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that after getting information regarding transportation of Heroin, the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), intercepted a bolero car bearing Registration no. JH01-U-6985 and arrested the petitioner. Upon search of the said vehicle, total 1040.500 grams Heroin was recovered from said vehicle which is alleged to be driven by this petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner has no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4764 of 2023(2) dt.06-04-2023 2/2 concern with the alleged recovery of Heroin or with the said vehicle from where the recovery has been made. A statement has been made in para-3 of the petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 11.3.2022. Learned counsel for D.R.I. has vehemently opposed the prayed for bail and submitted that the petitioner was found sitting as driver of the said vehicle from where the recovery of Heroin has been made. The said recovery of heroin is alleged to be 1040.500 grams which comes under purview of commercial quantity. It is further submitted that during investigation, the petitioner confessed his guilt as he was transporting of recovered heroin.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Amandeep/- U T