Patna High Court

Arjun YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 March 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

Arjun Yadav was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act for allegedly transporting 29 kg of ganja on a bike near the Nepal border. The petitioner contended that the FIR did not name him, he had no possession of the seized contraband, and the seizure violated Section 105 of the BNSS Act. He also highlighted that he had been in judicial custody since 11 October 2025 and had two prior criminal cases. The State opposed bail, citing the serious nature of the offence and the petitioner’s antecedents. After hearing both sides, the Court, noting the procedural irregularities and the petitioner’s circumstances, ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted to the accused under the NDPS Act despite alleged possession of a large quantity of narcotics
Whether procedural lapses in seizure (non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS Act) affect the bail decision
Impact of the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents on the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Bihar Narcotic Substances (Control) Act — s. 105
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 8

Subjects

bail
NDPS Act
possession
seizure procedure
Section 105 BNSS
criminal antecedent
border smuggling

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11872 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2025 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Arjun Yadav S/o Lal Yadav @ Jay Lal Yadav R/o Village - Bishanpur, P.S -
                 Jogbani, District – Araria                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   23-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Jogbani P.S. Case No.60 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 8 & 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act.

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

                   personnel received an information that ganja is to be transported

                   near Bishunpur border pillar no. 176/01. On this information, the

                   informant constituted a team and reached near Bishunpur village.

                   At 19:00 hrs, he found that some suspected persons are coming

                   from the side of Nepal on a bike. When the informant and his

                   associates tried to intercept them, they started fleeing away. They

                   were being chased but they fled away leaving the bike and bag.

                   After that some informers have disclosed that the petitioner along

                   with others were on the bike and from that bike in two bags

                   altogether 29 kg of ganja was recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11872 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026
                                                        2/2




                      of this petitioner and from perusal of the FIR itself it is clear that it

                      is not disclosed in the FIR as to who has named the petitioner. The

                      petitioner is not concerned in any way with the bike. Learned

                      counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the witnesses

                      of the seizure list are police personnel and police has not complied

                      Section 105 of the BNSS while making seizure. Learned counsel

                      for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is in

                      judicial custody since 11.10.2025.

                                   5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                      for the State and he has submitted that the petitioner is having

                      criminal antecedeent of two cases.

                                   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 enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond

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

                      like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court of

                      Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (NDPS Act), Araria in

                      connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No.60 of 2025.



                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…