High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Dharmendra Kumar vs Union Of India Through Directo on 26 July, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Dharmendra Kumar vs Union Of India Through Directo on 26 July, 2011
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                        Cr.Misc. No.9610 of 2011
           Dharmendra Kumar son of Late Jagannath Prasad Singh
                                  Versus
                     Union of India Through Director
                                   With
                        Cr.Misc. No.12639 of 2011
                     1. Prem Sah son of Mast Ram Sah
                    2. Aslam Ansari son of Amjad Ansari
                                  Versus
                            The State Of Bihar
                                 -----------

3. 26.7.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and

the State.

The petitioners seek bail in Muzaffarpur Sadar

P.S. case No.247 of 2009 instituted for the offence

u/ss.20/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

The petitioners were refused bail by an order

dated 27.4.2010 vide Cr.Misc.No.3290 of 2010 with

Cr.Misc.No.7441 of 2010 considering the manner in

which 35 kgs of ganja was being smuggled by the

petitioners.

The prayer for bail has been renewed on the

ground that there has been unnecessary delay in trial.

A report was called for from the Trial Court

which reveals that the case was pending for some

reason or the other including the supply of police papers

and finally charge was framed on 22.2.2011, where after

the witnesses are not turned up and then the court of 6 th

Additional Sessions Judge is vacant. The report of the

Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur reveals that now the case
-2-

has been sent to 5th Additional Sessions Judge,

Muzaffarpur for trial.

The Trial Court (5th Additional Sessions Judge,

Muzaffarpur) is directed to send a list of the witnesses

fixing specific dates for production of the witnesses

along with a copy of this order to the S.P., Muzaffarpur

and the S.P., Muzaffarpur is directed to ensure

production of the witnesses on the date so fixed by the

Trial Court so that there is no further delay in trial.

The Director, F.S.L. is directed to send the

F.S.L. report with regard to the present case i.e.

Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. case No.247 of 2009 dated

9.10.2009, if it has not sent already. The Director will

also cross check the report to ensure that a fake report

has not been sent to the Trial Court.

In view of nature of allegations, I am not

inclined to review the earlier order. The prayer for bail is

once again rejected.

Narendra/                        ( Anjana Prakash, J. )