Patna High Court
Raj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and violative of Article 21, and therefore granted bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Raj Kumar, accused under Sections 21(c), 23(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act, applied for regular bail for the second time after his earlier bail plea was rejected on the ground of recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity. He had been in judicial custody since 9 April 2025 and argued that his continued detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The court examined the length of pre‑trial detention, the lack of prior criminal antecedents, and the fact that a co‑accused had been granted bail on a second attempt. Concluding that further detention would be punitive and contrary to the spirit of Article 21, the court granted bail with a cash bond of Rs 15,000 and two sureties, imposing conditions of family surety and mandatory appearance in court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the alleged recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the grant of bail to a co‑accused on a second attempt influences the petitioner’s bail application.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21, 23, 29
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- contraband
- commercial quantity
- second bail attempt
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19912 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2025 Thana- Haraiya District- East Champaran
======================================================
Raj Kumar S/O Late Santosh Prasad Resident of Village/Mohalla - Ashram
Tola, Raxaul, P.S.- Raxaul, District - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhurendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Haraiya P.S. Case No. 35 of 2025, instituted for the offences
under Sections 21(c), 23(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
10.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43337 of 2025 taking into
consideration the recovery of contraband beyond commercial
quantity.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 09.04.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19912 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that
the continued incarceration of the petitioner without conclusion
of trial amounts to a gross violation of the fundamental right
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which
reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of Judgments. It is
lastly submitted that other co-accused has been enlarged on
regular bail on second attempt vide order dated 11.03.2026,
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9549 of 2026.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, the period of custody undergone by the petitioner and
taking into account the fact that continued detention of the
petitioner would serve no purpose other than punitive pretrial
incarceration, which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of
the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to
the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Haraiya P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19912 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
No. 35 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the
family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.