This High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's regular bail application in a narcotics case involving opium possession. The court found the prosecution witnesses incomplete and denied bail, directing the trial court to conclude the trial within six months.
Bail application rejected; trial court directed to expedite trial within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10508 of 2020
Ol Se Bodra … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party ---
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR --- For the Petitioner : Mrs. Shruti Shrestha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Spl.P.P. ---
The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsel for the parties had no objections with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.
---
03/24.02.2021: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The present application has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in connection with Ormanjhi P.S. Case No.188 of 2019 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No.07 of 2020, registered for the offence under Sections 17, 18, 22 and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, pending in the Court of the learned A.J.C.-XX, Ranchi.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 08.11.2019. Although commercial quantity of opium has been shown to the recovery from the possession of the petitioner, but as per the deposition of prosecution witness no.1 namely Jamadar Munda, the same has not been sealed. Only one witness has been examined till date.
On the other hand, counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and stated that the bail of another co-accused has been rejected and further commercial quantity of opium has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner and as such he does not deserve bail.
Considering the material available on record, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, at this stage.
Accordingly, the present bail application is, hereby, rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial as early as possible preferably within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Amar/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted regular bail in a case involving alleged possession of opium under the N.D.P.S. Act.
Whether the trial court is directed to expedite the trial.
Whether the recovery of commercial quantity of opium negates bail eligibility.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ol Se Bodra
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
