Dismissed

Chhannu Rai v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC11 May 2016CR. MISC./5080/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an NDPS case where four quintals of Ganja were recovered, the petitioner sought bail after 12 prosecution witnesses were examined. The High Court, rejecting the bail prayer due to the serious nature of the charge, directed the trial court to conclude the trial within two months and secured the attendance of remaining witnesses within two weeks to avoid further delay.

What did the court decide?

Bail prayer rejected; trial directed to be concluded within two months; remaining witnesses directed to appear within two weeks to prevent delay.

Chhannu Rai Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.5080 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -234 Year- 2011 Thana -DALSINGHSARAI District- SAMASTIPUR ====================================================== 1. Chhannu Rai Son of late Manku Rai Resident of village - Ballochak, P.S. - Dalsingsarai, District - Samastipur. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Zonal Director, Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.N.P. Sinha, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Jitendra Narain Sinha, Adv. Rashmi Bharti, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Anita Kumari(App) For the UOI : Mr. Anshuman Singh, CGC, UOI, ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶3

3 11-05-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶4

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Sections-20, 21 & 23 of the NDPS Act.

¶5

Four quintals Ganja are said to have been recovered from house of the petitioner, for which, petitioner is in jail custody since 12-10-2012 but the trial court has reported that out of 15 proposed prosecution witnesses; 12 prosecution witnesses have already been examined.

¶6

Therefore, considering the present stage of trial of the petitioner as well as the charge, levelled against him, I am not inclined to release him on bail and accordingly, his prayer for bail

¶7

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5080 of 2016 (3) dt.11-05-2016

¶8

2/2

¶9

in connection with NDPS Case No. 14 of 2012/2419 of 2014 arising out of Dalsingsarai P.S. Case No. 234 of 2011 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Ist, Samastipur is, again rejected.

¶10

the

¶11

However, learned Additional Sessions JudgeIst/concerned court, Samastipur is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order and, if, trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the above-said period of two months due to fault of the prosecution, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial court itself.

¶12

Let a copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur with direction to him to ensure the presence of remaining prosecution witnesses of the aforesaid case before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Ist, Samastipur within two weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order, failing which, the matter shall be viewed seriously.

¶13

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶14

A.K.V./-

¶15

U T

Chhannu Rai v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhannu Rai v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jai Shankar Kumar @ Bhola Jee @ Bhola Sah Vs The State Of Bihar

Jai Shankar Kumar @ Bhola Jee Vs The State Of Bihar

Golu Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Manjay Ram @ Manjay Kumar Ram Vs The State Of Bihar

Bishawmbhar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Shivan Sah Vs The State Of Bihar