Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Goshwami v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86524 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2024 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura ====================================================== Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Goshwami, S/o- Late Bishundev Goshwami, R/v- Dumrail, Ward No-5, P.S- Puraini, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Senior Advocate Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 19-06-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDPS Case No.50 of 2025, arising out of Puraini P.S. Case No. 193 of 2024, registered for the alleged offence under Sections 8/20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, police received information about the petitioner and his co-accused mother keeping a consignment of ganja in their house. A raid was conducted and a lady fled away from the house and the petitioner was apprehended. From search of the house, recovery of 57.5 kg. of ganja was made.

4. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86524 of 2025(9) dt.19-06-2026 2/3 the petitioner submits that this is the second attempt of the petitioner to seek bail from this Court as his prayer for bail was rejected vide order dated 13.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.6179 of 2025. The learned senior counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 07.10.2024 and the prosecution evidence has been closed. The learned senior counsel further submits that as the prosecution evidence has been closed in this case, the learned trial court may be directed to deliver the judgment within a month.

5. The learned APP vehemently opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. The learned APP submits that no fresh ground has been brought on record for reconsideration of prayer of bail and the period of custody could not be a ground.

6. A report dated 07.05.2026 has been received from the learned trial court about the present stage of trial wherein the learned trial court has submitted that the prosecution evidence has been closed and the case was fixed for recording the statement of co-accused on 20.05.2026.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties, I do not find any new ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Hence,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86524 of 2025(9) dt.19-06-2026 3/3 his prayer for grant of bail is rejected.

8. Since the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the defence does not intend to adduce any evidence in that case, the learned trial court would proceed expeditiously in the matter and try to dispose of it at the earliest and preferably within a month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T