Patna High Court

Md. Istiyak AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The bail petition is dismissed as there are no new grounds and the earlier order denying bail stands.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Istiyak Alam, sought regular bail in a special NDPS case involving offences under Sections 277 and 278 of the IPC, Sections 27(i)(ii) and 27(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, and Sections 8(c), 21(b), 30(a) of the NDPS Act as well as Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. This was his second bail application after the Patna High Court had earlier rejected his bail on 1 July 2025, citing the large quantity of contraband and an embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner argued that he had been in judicial custody since 1 January 2025, had no criminal antecedents, and that the trial was far from conclusion. The State opposed bail, noting that only two of six prosecution witnesses had been examined and that there were no new grounds to revisit the earlier decision. The Court found no fresh material or change in circumstances and therefore dismissed the bail petition, directing the lower court to expedite the trial.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the earlier rejection and absence of new grounds.
Whether the limited examination of prosecution witnesses justifies denial of bail.
Whether the quantity of contraband and the embargo under Section 37 NDPS Act warrant continued denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Drugs and Cosmetics Act — s. 27(2), 27(i)(ii)
Indian Penal Code — s. 277, 278
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(b), 30(a), 37, 8(c)

Subjects

bail
NDPS Act
drug offences
criminal procedure
trial delay
embargo
repeat bail petition

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10288 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-380 Year-2024 Thana- Sahayak Khajanchi District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Istiyak Alam Son of Late Ainul Haque @ Alnul Haque Resident of
                 village- Basantpur Ward nO. 46, P.S- Purnea Sadar, Dist- Purnea At present
                 Madhopara Durga Asthan Ward no. 26, Ps- Sahayak Khajanchi, Dist- Purnea
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Amit Kumar Anand, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-02-2026             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State.

                           2.       The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special

                   NDPS Case No. 72 of 2025, arising out of Sahayak Khajanchi

                   P.S. Case No. 380 of 2024 instituted for the offences under

                   Sections 277 & 278 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 27(i)(ii)

                   & 27(2) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Sections 8(c) &

                   21(b) of the NDPS Act as also Section 30(a) of the Bihar

                   Prohibition and Excise 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 01.07.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19233 of 2025, taking

                   into account recovery of contraband beyond commercial
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10288 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                     quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS

                     Act.

                              4.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                     petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 01.01.2025

                     without any rhymes or reason, having no criminal antecedent.

                     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no

                     likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, hence,

                     petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

                              6.     Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                     grant of bail. Referring to impugned order, it is submitted that

                     two (2) out of six (6) prosecution witnesses have been examined

                     in this case, hence, petitioner does not deserve the privilege of

                     bail.

                              7.     There is no new ground to consider the bail petition

                     of the petitioner, which is already decided by this Court on

                     merit.

                              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.


                                                                 (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…