Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Saurav KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, holding that the co‑accused’s statement does not suffice to deny bail and that the petitioner’s circumstances merit release on bond.

Summary

The petitioner, Saurav Kumar, was charged under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 22, 27(A) and 29 of the NDPS Act for allegedly being involved in the recovery of 116.640 kg of ganja from a van. He contended that the narcotics were seized from a co-accused, Rishav Kumar, and that no contraband was found on his person, asserting his innocence and lack of prior criminal record. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Toofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, arguing that a co‑accused’s statement under the NDPS Act cannot be used to incriminate another accused. The State opposed the bail application, citing the seriousness of the offence. The Patna High Court, after considering the facts and the precedent, granted regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, directing the petitioner’s release.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under the NDPS Act despite the large quantity of narcotics involved.
  • Whether a co‑accused’s statement can be used as evidence to implicate the petitioner.
  • Whether the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record and the circumstances warrant the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • NDPS Act
  • regular bail
  • co‑accused statement
  • drug trafficking
  • evidentiary value
  • bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11584 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2025 Thana- Bajitpur District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Saurav Kumar son of Bhola Singh resident of village Bachha (NOMA) P.S.
                 Halsi District Lakhisarai.
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Saurav Anand, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-03-2026                   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 20 (b) (ii)

                   ( C ), 22, 27 (A) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

                                3.    The prosecution case, in brief, is that a total

                   quantity of 116.640 kg of ganja, a contraband substance, was

                   allegedly recovered from a van.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

                   connection with the present case. It is further submitted that no

                   contraband has been recovered from the possession of the

                   petitioner. It is contended that the recovery was made from the

                   possession of one Rishav Kumar, and the name of the present

                   petitioner has surfaced only in the statement of the said co-
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11584 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                                        2/2




                      accused.

                                   5. It is further submitted that, in view of the judgment

                      of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Toofan Singh v. State of

                      Tamil Nadu, the statement of a co-accused recorded under the

                      NDPS Act has no evidentiary value for the purpose of

                      implicating another accused. It is further submitted that the

                      petitioner has been in judicial custody since 15.12.2025 and has

                      no criminal antecedent.

                                   6. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer

                      for bail.

                                   7. Considering the aforesaid 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 PTN (Special Case No. 2351 of 2025

                      arising out of Bajitpur P.S. Case No. 89 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 Sessions Judge

                      cum Special Judge (NDPS Act), Darbhanga.


                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-

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.