IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81907 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2022 Thana- KUCHAIKOTE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Shiv kumar S/o Yogendra Resident of Village- Vid Farma, P.S.- Sadar, Hasi, Distt.- Hisar, State- Haryana ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Priya Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anita Kumari, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 3 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 249 of 2022, instituted for the offences under Sections 20(b)II(c), 23, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 14.11.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 61474 of 2024, taking into account the recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity. 4. In compliance of the order dated 28.11.2025, a report dated 08.12.2025 with regard to the present stage of trial Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81907 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026 2/2 has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that charge has been framed on 16.05.2023. It is further reported that all chargesheet witnesses have been examined in this case and only two independent witnesses have to be examined in this case. The trial of the case may be concluded within two months. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 05.06.2022 without any rhymes or reason. 6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the trial is going on and is at an advance stage. 8. 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. manish/- (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) U T