Patna High Court
Deepak KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Kumar, was implicated in a case involving the recovery of 30.5 kg of ganja from a vehicle, alleged to be a party to a criminal conspiracy under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 27(a) and 29 of the NDPS Act. He sought bail, arguing that no contraband was found in his possession, his name arose only from a co‑accused’s confessional statement, he has no prior criminal record, and the procedural requirements of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were not complied with. The State opposed bail, contending that the recovered quantity exceeds commercial limits and that the petitioner is a conspirator, invoking the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The Court examined the facts, noted the large quantity of narcotics and the alleged conspiracy, and concluded that these circumstances outweigh the petitioner's arguments. Consequently, the bail petition was rejected and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial without undue delays.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the petitioner under the NDPS Act despite the recovery of narcotics above commercial quantity and alleged participation in a criminal conspiracy.
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused provides sufficient basis to deny bail.
- Whether the absence of seized contraband from the petitioner’s possession and lack of prior criminal antecedents affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 27(a), 29, 37, 42, 50
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- bail
- commercial quantity
- drug trafficking
- criminal conspiracy
- anticipatory bail
- confessional statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11600 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2025 Thana- UDWANTNAGAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Deepak Kumar Son of Uma Shankar Mahto R/o Village - Masrah, P.S. -
Udwantnagar, Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, A.P.P.
======================================================
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
Udwant Nagar (Gajrajganj) P.S. Case No. 38 of 2025 instituted
for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 27(a)
and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that there is
recovery of 30.500 Kg ganja from a car.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Anticipatory Bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Bench
vide order dated 04.04.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous
No. 21960 of 2025. No incriminating material has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11600 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
2/2
petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of ganja.
The petitioner was not arrested on the spot. The name of the
petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of confessional
statement made by co-accused person and the same has got no
evidentiary value. The petitioner is in custody since 30.06.2025
and has got no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of
Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned
APP submits that the petitioner being party to the criminal
conspiracy, as also the recovered contraband is above the
commercial quantity, hence, there is bar under Section 37 of the
NDPS Act.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, recovery above the commercial quantity and the
petitioner being party to the criminal conspiracy, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. The Trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue
delay and unnecessary adjournments.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…