IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31519 of 2008 ASHOK PASWAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 26.9.2008 Heard. The house of the petitioner was searched and police recovered 50 grams of Heroine and a cartridge from there. The petitioner was apprehended. The contention is that it was not the solitary petitioner who had been arrested rather 12 other persons were also arrested and brought to the police station on 7th August, 2006 but they could not be produced in court. They were produced and remanded in the case on 9th August, 2006. It was pointed out that police has taken very fictitous plea that when the arrested persons were taken to the court premises, court hour had been over and , as such, they could not be remanded. One could not accept this plea of the police and it is really a matter of shock and anxiety that the rules of forwarding and producing an accused, which appears in section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stands violated in the present case but it could not vitiate the remand of the petitioner because thereafter the remand was valid in a cognizable and non-bailable offence. As regards the merit of the matter, considering the recovery of 50 grams of Heroine, I am not inclined to direct release of the petitioner on bail. The petition is dismissed. On perusal of the rejection order and that was the contention - 2 - also, I find that the learned Judge had not fixed the case for its trial and it is contended that the date on which the rejection order was passed a contention was raised that the petitioner should be given at least expeditious trial but the learned Trial Judge did not express any opinion on the contention. I could direct the learned Judge to expedite hearing and dispose it of as quickly as possible. sudip ( Dharnidhar Jha,J )