Patna High Court
Niraj Tiwari @ Niraj Kr.versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Niraj Tiwari, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 8 and 20(B)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment) Act for alleged possession of 5.4 litres of liquor and 1 kilogram of ganja. He claimed he was merely an informer and that the seized items actually belonged to him, alleging that the real owner, Chandra Mohan Tiwari, was falsely implicated. The State opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner has a prior case, the investigation is ongoing, and he may abscond if released. The court examined the allegations, the petitioner’s antecedent, and the seriousness of the narcotics offence. Concluding that the risk of absconding and the nature of the charges outweighed the petitioner’s claim, the court denied the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate exercise of discretion by the court in granting or refusing anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged possession of narcotics and liquor?
- Does the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent and the possibility of absconding justify denial of anticipatory bail?
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(B)(ii)(B), 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- liquor possession
- ganja
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11147 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2025 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Niraj Tiwari @ Niraj Kr. S/o Arvind Tiwari R/o Village - Madhubani, P.S -
Sangrampur, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar No.Iii
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Sangrampur P.S. Case No.243/2025, registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 8, 20(B) (ii) (B) NDPS Act
and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise (Amendment)
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and allegation is of
recovery of 5.4 litres of liquor along with 1 kilogram of Ganja
from a place near the house of Chandra Mohan Tiwari. It is
next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in
the FIR, it would manifest that it was at the behest of this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11147 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
petitioner being an informer that the place of occurrence was
raided from where the alleged liquor and ganja was recovered
but then Chandra Mohan Tiwari disclosed that the ganja and the
liquor belongs to the petitioner, as such the petitioner came to be
implicated and Chandra Mohan Tiwari was not even made an
accused.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that it is not a case
of liquor but then the allegation is of recovery of one kilogram
of ganja from the place of occurrence also. It is also submitted
that no doubt from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that it was at the instance of this
petitioner that the place of occurrence was raided, from where
the alleged recoveries were made but then the chowkidar
informed the police that Chandra Mohan Tiwari is not involved
in the occurrence rather the liquor and the Ganja belongs to the
petitioner and since he has issues with Chandra Mohan Tiwari,
as such he got him implicated by giving false information to the
police. It is thus submitted that the petitioner came to be
implicated based on the disclosure made by the chowkidar. It is
also submitted that investigation in the case is continuing and
petitioner has antecedent of one case and if petitioner is granted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11147 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
the privilege of anticipatory bail, the petitioner may abscond.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…