Patna High Court
Pramod PrasadversusThe Union of India through NCB, Patna Branch
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court denied bail and ordered the trial court to complete the trial within three months.
Summary
The petitioner, Pramod Prasad, filed a bail application before the Patna High Court against the Union of India represented by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB). The trial court had concluded the prosecution evidence, after which the petitioner submitted written arguments on 08.05.2025, but the trial remained pending. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that the delay violated his right to a speedy trial. The High Court, after hearing counsel, declined to grant bail, finding no sufficient ground to release the petitioner. However, the Court directed the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously within three months of receiving the order, provided the petitioner's contentions are factual.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the delay in trial after prosecution evidence was closed
- Whether the trial court should be directed to expedite the pending trial
Subjects
- bail
- trial delay
- Narcotics Control Bureau
- expeditious trial
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23836 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2021 Thana- N.C.B (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL)
District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Pramod Prasad S/o Shankar Mahto R/o Village - Jhikatiya Kala, Post -
Maigara, P.S - Imamgang, District - Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India through NCB, Patna Branch Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar
For the N.C.B. : Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh (A.S.G)
Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh- C.G.C.
Mr. Ankit Kumar Singh
Ms. Neha Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Abhay
Kumar and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the N.C.B.
Sri Manoj Kumar Singh.
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
N.C.B. at the outset submits that trial has concluded.
3. The said submission of the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the NCB is not disputed by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, but then it is
submitted that after the prosecution evidence was closed, the
petitioner submitted his written argument on 08.05.2025, but
then the trial till date has not concluded.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23836 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026
2/2
the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail but then
directs the learned trial Court to ensure that the trial is
concluded expeditiously and within a period of three months
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order if
what has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner is a true fact.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…