Patna High CourtCR. MISC./83460/2025bail rejected

Brajesh Kumar @ Brijesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-09Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83460 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-619 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Nawada ====================================================== Brajesh Kumar @ Brijesh Kumar S/o Parma Sahni R/o Village - Khothwan, Ward No. 12, P.s - Dhanha, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aakash Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nawada Excise P.S. Case No. 619 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii) and 20(c) of the NDPS Act.

3. Earlier vide order dated 27.03.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18223 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the recovery of the contraband beyond the commercial quantity as per the NDPS Act.

4. In compliance of the order dated 28.11.2025 a report dated 08.12.2025 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83460 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026 2/2 that there are total five charge-sheeted witnesses and the charges have been framed on 02.09.2025 but none of the witnesses has been examined.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 09.09.2024 without any rhymes or reason.

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

7. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of four months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T