Patna High Court
Bhakol @ Ibrar @ Bhakola RayeenversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhakol Rayeen, was arrested on 16 May 2024 in connection with a case under Sections 8(c) and 21(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, based largely on the testimony of a co-accused, Vijay Kumar, who alleged that the petitioner supplied the drugs. The petitioner had previously applied for bail twice, both of which were rejected by the Patna High Court. He argued that he was innocent, that the co-accused had already been granted bail, and that no other evidence linked him to the offence. The prosecution opposed bail, citing five prior criminal antecedents, although the petitioner was already on bail in those matters. Considering the lack of direct evidence, the granting of bail to co-accused, and the petitioner’s long custody, the court ordered bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under the NDPS Act despite the allegations of the co‑accused.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the fact that co‑accused persons have been granted bail influences the petitioner’s bail application.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(a), 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 8(c)
- Section 21(a)
- criminal antecedents
- co‑accused
- bail conditions
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12541 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANIYA District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Bhakol @ Ibrar @ Bhakola Rayeen Son of Akbar Miya R/O Village -
Stuwarganj, Ward No.- 7, Mohaniya, P.S.- Mohania, District - Kaimur
(Bhabua)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Rai, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 22-04-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Rai, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
16.05.2024 in connection with Mohania P.S. Case No. 222 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 13.04.2024 for the offences punishable under
Sections 8(c) and 21(a) of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected twice vide order dated 25.09.2024 and 04.07.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 51857 of 2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 33455
of 2025 respectively by this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12541 of 2026(4) dt.22-04-2026
2/4
present case. He further submits that the petitioner was not
apprehended at the place of occurrence and his name has been
transpired during investigation on the basis of the disclosure
made by the apprehended co-accused person, namely, Vijay
Kumar and he has stated that he has purchased the
drugs/injections in question fromm the petitioner. Except the
aforesaid, nothing has come during investigation which suggest
the involvement of the petitioner in the presnet occurrence. He
further submits that the similarly situated co-accused, namely,
Vijay Kumar has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 22.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
52555 of 2024 and another co-accused, namely, Lalji Mali has
been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 28.08.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 49249 of 2024.
Apart from these, other co-accused persons have also been
granted bail by difference Co-ordinate Benches of this court. He
further submits that the police after investigation submitted the
charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody
since 16.05.2024.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the
ground that the petitioner carries five criminal antecedents other
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12541 of 2026(4) dt.22-04-2026
3/4
than the present one but fairly submits that he is on bail in all
the pending matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis
of disclosure made by the apprehended co-accused and the said
co-accused person has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court as well as period of custody, let the petitioner,
above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge cum
Special Judge, Kaimur in connection with Mohania P.S. Case
No. 222 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court
and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12541 of 2026(4) dt.22-04-2026
4/4
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…