Ankit Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78387 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2025 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Ankit Raj S/o Tripurari Saran Tiwari R/o Village - Khajuhan, P.S - Rasulpur, District - Chhapra (Saran) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Lal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 14-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 16 of 2025, arising out of Udawantnagar P.S. Case No. 38 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 20(b)(ii) (c), 5, 27(A) & 29 of the NDPS Act.

3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 16827 of 2025, taking into account the fact that there was recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78387 of 2025(2) dt.14-11-2025 2/2 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.01.2025 without any rhymes or reason, having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel next submits that charge in this case is framed and no witness is examined till date, hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

6.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner which is already decided by this Court on merit. 7.

In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected.

8.

The District Magistrate, Bhojpur and the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur are also directed to take necessary steps to produce the witnesses on the date fixed in the Trial Court so that the trial could be concluded within the stipulated period.

9. Let this order be communicated to the District Magistrate, Bhojpur and the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T