Patna High Court
Gandhi KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding that continued detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21.
Summary
Gandhi Kumar was arrested in connection with a raid that uncovered heroin and live cartridges, and was charged under multiple sections of the NDPS Act and the Arms Act. He petitioned for bail, claiming he was falsely implicated, that no witness had been examined, and that nothing was recovered from his conscious possession. The petitioner had been in custody since 3 November 2024 and had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, but the court noted the prolonged pre‑trial detention violated Article 21 and that a co‑accused had already been granted bail. Considering parity and the lack of substantive evidence against him, the court granted bail on the condition of a cash bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under the NDPS Act and Arms Act despite the seriousness of the offences
- Whether the petitioner’s prolonged pre‑trial detention violates the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of evidence warrants bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)a, 26, 35
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21, 23, 25, 25A, 27(a), 29, 30, 32
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Arms Act
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- parity
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10322 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-898 Year-2024 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
Gandhi Kumar S/O Sunil Ram Resident of Mohalla-Shildag, Police Station-
Chhatarpur, District- Palamu (Jharkhand) at present residence of mohalla-
mubarkganj, p.s- sasaram town model district - Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, 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
Sasaram (Town) P.S. Case No. 898 of 2024 instituted for the
offence under Sections 21, 23, 25, 25A, 27(a), 29, 30 & 32 of
the NDPS Act and Sections 25(1-B)a, 35 & 26 of the Arms Act.
3. As per FIR, the informant has alleged that on
01.11.2024 at about 5 0' clock, on the basis of secret
information, he along with others raided in the house of Rohan
Chandravanshi. On seeing the police, one person tried to flee
away, who was caught. On query, he disclosed his name
Altumas and also disclosed that he and his associates Rohan
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10322 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
2/3
Kumar @ Rohan Chandravanshi, Vikas Kumar @ Appu, Anurag
Raj were illegally selling heroin in Sasaram locality. It is further
alleged that on raiding the house of Rohan, informant caught
Rohan Kumar @ Rohan Chandravanshi, Gandhi Kumar
(petitioner), Yash Kumar, Kundan Kumar and Vicky Kumar @
Mangru. During search, 930 grams, 722 grams and 233 grams
heroin along with live cartridges etc. have been recovered from
various places at the instance of accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is falsely implicated in the present case. It is mainly
submitted that charge in this case is framed and till date, no
witness has been examined hitherto. It has been submitted on
behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since
03-11-2024, having no criminal antecedent. Nothing has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
Learned counsel further submits that there is no likelihood of
the trial being concluded in the near future. Learned counsel
goes on to submit that the continued incarceration of the
petitioner without conclusion of trial amounts to a gross
violation of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21
of the Constitution of India, which is reiterated by Hon’ble
Apex Court in plethora of judgments. Other similarly situated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10322 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
3/3
co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated
17.11.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 72936 of 2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, period of custody of the petitioner, claim based on
parity and taking into account the fact that continued detention
of the petitioner would serve no purpose other than punitive
pretrial incarceration, which is antithetical to the spirit of Article
21 of the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Sasaram (Town) P.S.
Case No. 898 of 2024.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…