Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17760 (JHR)

GANESH CHAUDHARY v. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU

B.A./5891/2025 · 2025-08-29

Ambuj Nath

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:26097 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5891 of 2025 Ganesh Chaudhary, aged about 33 years, son of Lal Bahadur Chaudhary, resident of Doriawan, Sarai, Seosagar, P.O and P.S. Rohtas, District Rohtas, Bihar --- --- Petitioner Versus Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau --- --- Opp. Party --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath --- For the Petitioner: Mr. Kumar Harsh, Advocate For the O.P-NCB: Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGC --- 03 / 29.08.2025 Heard the parties. 2. Petitioner has been made accused in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 19 of 2023 arising out of P.S. Case No. 1/NDPS/Seizure/CUS/2023-24 for the offences registered under sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 22(c), 25 and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VIII- cum-Special Judge, NDPS, Ranchi. 3. Bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this court vide B.A. No. 10365 of 2023 by order dated 22.04.2024. 4. Petitioner is said to be the driver of a Tata Truck bearing registration no. WB-23C-4963 which was seized by the Informant near Apna Dhaba at Rampur. On search, 1192.14 kgs of cannabis were recovered from the said vehicle. 5. Report regarding the stage of the trial, earlier called for, has been received. It appears that out of nine witnesses, four witnesses have been examined and the trial was likely to be concluded within three months. 6. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that the trial is under progress, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected, at this stage. Learned Trial Court shall expedite the trial and preferably conclude the same within three months from the next date fixed for recording of the evidence, failing which, petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail. (Ambuj Nath, J) Ranjeet/ Uploaded