Patna High Court

Ajeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner subject to bond and attendance conditions.

Summary

Ajeet Kumar was arrested in connection with a large seizure of 119.29 kg of ganja recovered from the premises of co-accused Ranjan Kumar. The prosecution’s case rests on a confessional statement of Ranjan Kumar, who alleged that the petitioner supplied the narcotics. The petitioner argued that no narcotics were found on his person and that a police confessional statement is not admissible under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s seven prior criminal cases. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court granted regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and ordered weekly attendance at the police station, subject to cooperation in the trial.

Issues considered

Whether a confessional statement made to police is admissible as evidence under Section 67 of the NDPS Act for the purpose of denying bail.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of regular bail.
Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses, warranting denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 22(c), 25, 29, 67, 80(c)

Subjects

regular bail
NDPS Act
confessional statement
drug trafficking
criminal antecedent
court discretion

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12847 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2024 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Ajeet Kumar S/o Suresh Singh R/o Village - Shankarpur, P.S - Ankorhigola,
                 District – Rohtas                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-02-2026                  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 80(c), 20(b)

                   (ii)(c), 22(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

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

                   basis of secret information the informant along with others has

                   searched the car and the house of one Ranjan Kumar and

                   altogether 119 kg 290 gm of ganja was recovered from the car and

                   house of Ranjan Kumar. On query, he disclosed that his associates

                   Vinay Kumar, Satyaveer Kumar and this petitioner have given the

                   said ganja to supply the same in locality.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   nothing has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner

                   and his name has surfaced only in the confessional statement of

                   co-accused Ranjan from whom the recovery was made. Learned
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12847 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner

                      is in judicial custody since 12.08.2025.

                                   5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further

                      submitted that Hon’ble Apex Court has held in the case of Tofan

                      Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1                 that a

                      confessional statement made before police is not a legal material

                      in view of Section 67 of the NDPS Act.

                                   6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently

                      opposed the bail application of the petitioner and has submitted

                      that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of seven cases.

                                   7. 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 with the condition that

                      the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall mark his

                      attendance weekly at Akorhigola P.S. The above named petitioner

                      is directed to be released on bail in connection with Akorhigola

                      P.S. Case No. 302 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-

                      (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

                      satisfaction of learned Session Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram.



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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…