IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3290 of 2010 DHARMENDRA KUMAR S/O LATE JAGARNATH PRASAD SINGH Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU, NEW DELHI THROUGH DIRECTOR GENERAL With Cr.Misc. No.7441 of 2010 1. PREM SAH SON OF MAST RAM SAH 2. ASLAM ANSARI SON OF AMJAD ANSARI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH COMMISSIONER, CUSTOM, PATNA ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Balak Mahto, Senior Advocate (In Cr.Misc.No.3290 of 2010) Dr. Amrendra Kumar No.1, Advocate (In Cr.Misc.No.7441 of 2010) For the Union of India : Mr. D. Surendra, C.G.C. For the State : Mr. Choube Jawahar, A.P.P. ---------- 5. 27.4.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, the State and the Union of India. The petitioners seek bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 20 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The facts of the case are very interesting and warrant serious consideration. The prosecution case is that the informant, who is S.I. Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S., received an information that some suspicious persons had been unloaded from a bus and put on a silver colour Scorpio and proceeded towards Bhagwanpur and the same should be checked. Upon this information, the car was intercepted from which four persons were apprehended, namely, Dharmendra Kumar, Md. Mansur, Aslam Ansari and Prem Sah. The accused Dharmendra Kumar, who claimed to be a sepoy of the custom department, stated that he on suspicion had arrested - 2 - Prem Sah and Aslam Ansari and they were being taken to the Regional office and information about the same had been given to the Regional office. When this information was relayed by the informant to the Officer-Incharge of the Police Station, he called back to say that he had verified with the custom officials at Muzaffarpur and Barauni who stated that it was totally untrue. Still more interesting is the fact that apart from 35 kgs of ganja found in the car, a beacon light and a pair of handcuffs were recovered from inside the car and on the car was the plate declaring it to be on the services of the Central Government. A deeper investigation revealed that in fact the car had not been pressed into the service of the Government of India and in fact the entire occurrence had been stage-managed to make out that the two accused had been apprehended with incriminating articles, whereas it was a case of smuggling. In view of the serious nature of the offence and manner of occurrence showing the complicity even of government officials in such an offence having wider ramifications, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. The prayer for bail is rejected. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial so as to conclude it within a period of nine months in view of the seriousness ramification of the case. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )