Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. Ishak @ Isak @ Md. IsakversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Ishak, sought bail in a case (Purnea Sadar PS Case No. 540 of 2025) under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act, where the prosecution alleged that 10.65 grams of contraband were seized from his possession. The petitioner claimed innocence, asserted that no seizure was made from him, and argued that the police failed to comply with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He also highlighted that a co‑accused, Md. Aslam, had been granted bail in a similar case and that he had been in judicial custody since 24‑10‑2025. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s two prior criminal cases. After hearing both sides, the court found the circumstances sufficient to grant bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted in an NDPS case where the quantity seized exceeds the ‘small quantity’ threshold but is less than ‘commercial quantity’.
  • Whether non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS during seizure affects the bail decision.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude bail.
  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail on the same footing as the co‑accused Md. Aslam.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • drug seizure
  • small quantity
  • commercial quantity
  • criminal antecedent
  • Section 105
  • equality before law
  • surety

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10124 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-540 Year-2025 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Ishak @ Isak @ Md. Isak S/o Md. Kayum R/o vill- Lakahanjhari, Hasda,
                 Zeromile, PS- Sadar, District- Purnea

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   18-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Purnea Sadar P.S. Case No. 540 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that

                   altogether 10.65 grams of smack like contraband was recovered

                   from the possession of this petitioner.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

                   offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also

                   submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of

                   this petitioner. He also submits that the witnesses of the seizure

                   list are police personnel and the police has not complied with
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10124 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
                                                       2/2




                     Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He further

                     submits that the alleged contraband recovered from the possession

                     of the petitioner is more than small quantity but is much less than

                     commercial quantity. He further submits that similarly situated co-

                     accused namely, Md. Aslam has been granted bail by this court

                     vide Cr. Misc. No. 12568 of 2026. The case of this petitioner

                     stands on similar footing. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing

                     in judicial custody since 24.10.2025.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of two cases.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.          The above named

                     petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                     bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of

                     the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special

                     Judge (NDPS Act), Purnea in connection with Purnea Sadar P.S.

                     Case No. 540 of 2025.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.