Petitioner sought bail in a narcotics case involving 4.450 kg of Charas. Judicial officer rejected bail due to commercial quantity and found no merit in false implication claims, directing trial expeditions.
Prayer for bail stands rejected; trial directed to be expedited.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6322 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-608 Year-2021 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West
Champaran
======================================================
Chadeshwar Prasad @ Chandrashekhar Prasad @ Satish Kumar Son Of Late Nathuni Prasad R/O Pipra Ward No. 5, P.S- Chanpatia Dist- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
4 04-09-2023
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Lal Babu Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER
... ... Opposite Party/s
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 608 of 2021 instituted for the offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Section 414 of the IPC.
Prosecution case relates to recovery of 4.450 kg Charas like narcotics substance from a hotel and the petitioner along with one co-accused person was apprehended by the police with the said incriminating article and at their instance, some other charas smugglers were apprehended.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this present case. It is further submitted that the provision of NDPS Act has not been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6322 of 2023(4) dt.04-09-2023 2/2
followed in this case. It is also submitted that the recovery has been made from the joint possession and also as per seizure list , it is not clear from whose possession how much charas like substance has been recovered. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 29.10.2021.
Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the petitioner is named in FIR and the recovered quantity of charas like substance comes within the purview of commercial quantity as per NDPS Act and also the petitioner was apprehended on spot with the incriminating article.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.
(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J)
shubham/- U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in a narcotic offence involving commercial quantity.
Whether the trial should be expedited given the petitioner's prolonged custody.
Chadeshwar Prasad @ Chandrashekhar Prasad @ Satish Kumar
The State of Bihar
SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
