Patna High Court
Md. Aftab @ AftabversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, holding that the confessional statement of a co‑accused is inadmissible and the petitioner’s clean record warrants release.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Aftab, sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 21(c), 22 and 23 of the NDPS Act, 1985 for alleged illicit sale of cough syrup. The FIR does not name him; his alleged involvement is based solely on a confessional statement of co‑accused Md. Nayeem Baitha made while in police custody, which the court held has no evidentiary value. The petitioner has a clean antecedent, has been in custody since 26‑01‑2026, and no narcotic substance was recovered from his possession. Similar co‑accused, Nayeem Baitha and Pintu Kumar Das, had previously been released on bail by the same court. Considering these facts, the court directed the district court to grant bail on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions for cooperation and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the FIR not naming him and reliance on a co‑accused's confessional statement.
- Whether the lack of material recovery and the petitioner's clean antecedent justify bail under the NDPS Act.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(c), 22, 23, 37
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- confessional statement
- evidentiary value
- clean antecedent
- co‑accused
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18344 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- Bathnaha District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Aftab @ Aftab aged about 28 years (male), Son of Md. Jamil, R/o Village
- Amouna, Ward no. 20, P.S. - Jogbani, Dist. - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 13-05-2026 Heard Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Bathnaha P.S. Case No. 08 of 2025 registered for offences
punishable under Sections 21(c), 22 and 23 of the NDPS Act,
1985.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioner
along with other co-accused persons, was allegedly involved in
illicit sale of several brands of cough syrup.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18344 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
2/4
the FIR. Name of the petitioner has surfaced on the basis of
confessional statement made by co-accused Md. Nayeem Baitha
in police custody, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of
law and the said Md. Nayeem Baitha has been granted bail by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.03.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 12570 of 2025. Other similarly situated
co-accused namely Pintu Kumar Das has also been released on
bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
09.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30912 of 2025. Petitioner
has clean antecedent and he is in custody since 26.01.2026. Bar
of Section 37 will not come in a way because nothing has been
recovered from the physical possession of the petitioner. On
these grounds, petitioner seeks to be released on bail.
5. Learned A.P.P., for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, the fact that petitioner is not named in
the FIR. Name of the petitioner has surfaced on the basis of
confessional statement made by co-accused Md. Nayeem Baitha
in police custody, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of
law and the said Md. Nayeem Baitha has been granted bail by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.03.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18344 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
3/4
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 12570 of 2025. Other similarly situated
co-accused namely Pintu Kumar Das has also been released on
bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
09.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30912 of 2025. Petitioner is
in custody since 26.01.2026 and he has clean antecedent, the
learned District Court is directed to release the petitioner, above
named, on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge cum
Special Judge NDPS Act, Araria in connection with Bathnaha
P.S. Case No. 08 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:
(i) Bailors should be local having sufficient
immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court
concerned.
(ii) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.
(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty
to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar
nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall
take steps to cancel his bail bond.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18344 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
4/4
(v) The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.