Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner on condition of a bail bond and sureties.

Summary

Sonu Kumar was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act after 15.73 g of a smokable narcotic was seized from three persons riding a bike; the petitioner was not present at the seizure. He contended that the police failed to comply with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure and that the quantity seized, though more than a ‘small quantity’, was far below a commercial quantity. He had been in judicial custody since 9 October 2025 and sought regular bail, arguing lack of personal possession and procedural irregularities. The State opposed bail, citing a prior similar offence. After hearing both sides, the court held that the procedural lapse and the modest quantity justified granting bail, subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under the NDPS Act for alleged possession of a quantity less than commercial quantity.
  • Whether non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS in the seizure process warrants bail.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior similar offence justifies denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • possession
  • procedural lapse
  • small quantity
  • criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10507 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-228 Year-2025 Thana- KURSAILA District- Katihar
                 ======================================================
                 Sonu Kumar Son of Late Shankar Yadav @ Arjun Singh Resident of Village -
                 Rupauli, P.S. - Rupauli, Distirct - Purnea.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) and

                   21(b) of the NDPS Act.

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

                   three persons altogether 15.73 gm of smack like material was

                   recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is

                   the case of the prosecution that three persons on a bike were

                   going and from them this contraband was recovered, actually

                   the petitioner was not there. Learned counsel for the petitioner

                   has further submitted that the petitioner has been implicated by

                   the police. It has further been submitted that nothing has been
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10507 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The witnesses

                      of the seizure list are police personnel and police has not

                      complied Section 105 of the BNSS while making seizure. In any

                      view of the matter the contraband which has been alleged to be

                      recovered is though more than small quantity but is much less

                      than commercial quantity. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

                      further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial

                      custody since 09.10.2025.

                                   5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

                      the bail and has submitted that the petitioner is having criminal

                      antecedent of one case of similar nature.

                                   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 released on bail in connection with

                      Kursela P.S. Case No. 228 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

                      Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                      each to the satisfaction of learned Principal District and

                      Sessions Judge, Katihar.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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