Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18864 (PAT)

Babulal Kumar @ Babulal Mahto @ Babulal Mahato v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./40427/2026 · 2026-06-19

R P Mishra

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40427 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2024 Thana- ADAPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Babulal Kumar @ Babulal Mahto @ Babulal Mahato S/o Hargan Mahto R/o Village - Nautam, P.s. - Sangrampur, District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Harendra Prasad, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 2 19-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDPS No. 60 of 2024 / CIS No. 60 of 2024, arising out Adapur P.S. Case No. 150 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 20(b)(II) C and 23(C) of the NDPS Act. 3. Earlier vide order dated 24.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 68653 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 05.05.2024 without any rhymes or reason. 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40427 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026 2/2 grant of bail. 6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner. 7. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of five months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of five months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below. manish/- (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) U T