Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Suraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the NDPS charges, subject to a bond and sureties.

Summary

Suraj Kumar was arrested in connection with a Patliputra police case under Sections 8, 20(b) and 11(B) of the NDPS Act, where 1.250 kg of ganja was seized from him and a co‑accused. The petitioner contended that the seizure list did not specify the amount recovered from his possession and that the police failed to comply with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He had been in judicial custody since 9 January 2026 and the State opposed bail on the ground of his prior criminal antecedents, including a similar NDPS case. The Court examined the procedural irregularities, the fact that the quantity was less than a commercial amount, and the petitioner’s custody status. Finding no compelling reason to deny bail, the Court ordered that the petitioner be released on a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of the Special NDPS Judge.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted to an accused under Sections 8, 20(b) and 11(B) of the NDPS Act when the seized quantity is less than commercial quantity
  • Whether procedural lapses in the seizure (non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS) affect the bail decision
  • Impact of the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents on the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • seizure procedure
  • Section 105 BNSS
  • criminal antecedent
  • quantity of narcotics
  • judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16100 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2026 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Suraj Kumar Son of Rampreet Das @ Ram Prit Das R/o- Kutti Machine Gali,
                 Renter Of Badri Rai, P.S.- Patliputra, Dist-Patna        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Ms. Renu Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   01-05-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Patliputra P.S. Case No.21 of 2026 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 8, 20(b) and 11(B) of the

                   NDPS Act.

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

                   the possession of this petitioner and one Sameer, altogether

                   1.250 kg of ganja was recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner has submitted that nothing has been recovered from

                   the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the

                   petitioner has submitted that the seizure list was jointly made

                   regarding both the accused persons and it is not clear from the

                   seizure list as to what amount of contraband was recovered from

                   the possession of this petitioner. It has further been submitted

                   that the witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16100 of 2026(3) dt.01-05-2026
                                                        2/2




                      police have not complied Section 105 of the BNSS while

                      making seizure. It has further been submitted that the alleged

                      recovery of contraband is though more than small quantity but is

                      much less than the commercial quantity. Learned counsel for the

                      petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody

                      since 09.01.2026.

                                   5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                      for the State. Learned APP has submitted that the petitioner is

                      having criminal antecedent of two cases out of which one case

                      is of similar nature.

                                   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 court of learned

                      District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act,

                      Patna in connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No.21 of 2026.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.