Patna High Court
Arun PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court rejected the petitioner's bail application, holding that bail could not be granted at this stage.
Summary
Arun Paswan was arrested in connection with a case registered under sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(C) and 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, after police recovered 14.03 grams of heroin wrapped in 23 puriyas and Rs.11,780 from his possession. The petitioner filed an application for regular bail, contending that he was falsely implicated, that the seized quantity was only marginally above the statutory 'small quantity' threshold of 5 grams and far below the 'commercial quantity' of 250 grams, and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, relying on the forensic science laboratory report that confirmed the seized substance as heroin. After hearing both sides, the Court held that the confirmation of heroin and the nature of the offence warranted denial of bail at this stage. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, but the petitioner was permitted to file a fresh bail petition after completing one year in custody or after the charge is framed, whichever occurs later. The order was pronounced by Justice Partha Sarthy of the Patna High Court.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to a person accused under the NDPS Act for possession of 14.03 grams of heroin.
- Whether the quantity seized qualifies as a 'small quantity' warranting a more lenient bail approach.
- Whether the forensic confirmation of the seized substance as heroin precludes bail at the pre‑charge stage.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(C), 22(c), 8
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- regular bail
- small quantity
- heroin possession
- criminal procedure
- pre‑charge detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14154 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2026 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
Arun Paswan Son of Late Chhattu Paswan Resident of Gandhi Gali, 1st house
to the north of Prachin Devi Mandir, P.S.- Digha, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Akhauri Kamal Kishore Sahay, Advocate
Mr. Rahul Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4 13-05-2026 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Digha P.S. Case no.32 of
2026 registered under sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(C) and 22(c) of the
N.D.P.S. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, 23 puriyas of brown
sugar weighing a total of 14.03 grams besides Rs.11,780/- was
recovered from the possession of the petitioner.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the
case. No incriminating article has been recovered from the
petitioner’s possession. Accepting the allegations even for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14154 of 2026(4) dt.13-05-2026
2/2
sake of argument, it is submitted that the alleged quantity
recovered is slightly more than the small quantity of 5 grams but
much below the commercial quantity of 250 grams. The weight
of 14.03 grams is including the paper in which it is said to be
wrapped. The petitioner is in custody since 13.1.2026 and has
no criminal antecedent.
5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for
the State who submits that in the FSL report, the articles seized
has been confirmed to be Heroin.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations of recovery of 14.03
grams of Heroin in 23 puriyas, the Court is not inclined to
enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his
prayer for bail after completing one year in custody and after
framing of charge, whichever is later.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.