Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4113 (JHR)

NEERAJ SINGH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./1239/2025 · 2025-03-28

Rajesh Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.1239 of 2025 ---- Neeraj Singh, aged about 34 years, Son of Devnarayan Singh, Resident of Village-Near Band Vistar, Badarpur, Post Ofice & Police Station Badarpur, District-South Delhi …. …. Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P. ---- 04/Dated: 28th March, 2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the State. 2. The applicant, who is in custody since 03.07.2023, has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with N.D.P.S Case No.04 of 2023, arising out of Bano (Girda O.P) P.S. Case No.39 of 2021, registered for the offence under Sections 414/419/420/467/468/471 & 120-B of the IPC & Sections 20/22 & 27 (A) of the N.D.P.S Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge N.D.P.S, Simdega. 3. The prayer for bail of the applicant were earlier rejected twice by this Court, vide orders dated 10.01.2024 & 29.07.2024, passed in B.A No.8485 of 2023 & B.A No.4011 of 2024 respectively. 4. It appears that after examination of all the charge-sheeted witnesses, a petition under Section 311 of Cr.P.C has been filed for examination of four witnesses and out of which, one witness has already been examined. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant(s) that complete set of FIR along with its enclosure have been annexed with this bail application and there is no suppression on his/her part. Innocence has been claimed by the learned counsel for the applicant and undertaking has been given for participation in the trial. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been renewed. 6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. 7. Considering the materials available on record, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail ‘at this stage’. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the applicant is hereby, rejected once again. 8. However, the applicant is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within three months. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Raja/-Uploaded