Dismissed

Manish Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Jun 2020CR. MISC./66046/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioner's bail application in an NDPS case involving recovery of Charas. While denying bail due to the prima facie evidence of custody, the Court directed the trial court to expedite the trial and conclude within two months.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial directed to be concluded within two months; F.S.L. report to be obtained before case disposal.

Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66046 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-381 Year-2019 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Manish Kumar, Son of Naresh Prasad Yadav, Resident of Village - Professor Colony, Ramlakhan Singh Yadav College, Bettiah, P.S.- Muffasil (Bettiah), District- West Champaran

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ===================	... ... Opposite Party/s ===================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :	Mr. Arvind Kumar- Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : ===================	Mr. Dinesh Singh- A.P.P. ===================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 04-06-2020

¶11

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as

¶12

well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶13

Petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2019 and seeks bail in connection with Muffasil (Bettiah) P. S. Case No.381 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21, 22, 23 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶14

One kilogram of Charas is said to have been recovered from the house of the petitioner, but submission on behalf of the petitioner is that petitioner was taken into custody by the police on 07.07.2019 without any rhyme and reason and subsequently, on 09.07.2019, the alleged recovery from the house of the petitioner was shown by the police and, thereafter, police lodged this false case against the petitioner.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66046 of 2019(4) dt.04-06-2020 2/2

¶17

only two prosecution witnesses have been left to be examined and, therefore, if this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail, this Court may direct the trial Court to expedite the trial of the petitioner as early as possible preferably within two months.

¶18

The record goes to show that this Court had sought F.S.L. report of seized article, but the letter of Superintendent of Police, West Champaran at Bettiah dated 27.11.2019 goes to show that up-till-now, F.S.L. report has not been received.

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

¶20

However, learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial of the petitioner expeditiously and conclude the trial of the petitioner within two months from the date when the Court becomes physically functioning and, furthermore, before disposing of the case, the trial Court must obtain the F.S.L. report from Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna.

¶21

(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)

¶22

vikash/-

¶23

U T

Manish Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar v. The State of Bihar

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

Tilak Kumar @ Tilakana Vs The State of Bihar

Suphal Soren @ Supal Soren Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Singh @ Rajesh Raj Vs The State of Bihar

Jagdish Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Brajesh Patel Vs The State of Bihar