Patna High Court
Ranjeet Gupta @ Ranjeet Kumar GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- S B P SINGH
Holding
The Court held that, given the lack of direct evidence and the inadmissibility of the co‑accused’s confession, anticipatory bail must be granted under its inherent powers.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Gupta, was implicated in a case involving the seizure of 411.60 kg of ganja from a truck (Reg. No. HR38V2452) and charged under Section 111(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and several sections of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The petitioner argued that he had no direct possession of the contraband and that the only link to him was a confessional statement of a co‑accused, which he claimed was inadmissible. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail, contending the seriousness of the offence. The Court examined the lack of independent material evidence against the petitioner and the inadmissibility of the co‑accused’s confession. Consequently, the Court exercised its power under Section 482 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act to grant anticipatory bail, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties (one of whom must be a close relative), and a four‑week surrender period. The order effectively releases the petitioner on bail if arrested within the stipulated time.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in the absence of direct possession of the seized narcotics.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused can be used to link the petitioner to the offence.
- Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to justify denial of bail under the applicable statutes.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 111(2), 482
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(C), 20(B)iiC, 23(c), 25, 29, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- narcotics seizure
- confessional statement
- evidentiary insufficiency
- bail conditions
- Section 482
- NDPS Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22826 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-588 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Ranjeet Gupta @ Ranjeet Kumar Gupta S/o- Late Ganesh Sah R/V- Surajpur
Koiriya Tola P.S.- Piprakothi Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Eashita Raj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Renuka Ratanakar (App125)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Muffasil (Motihari) P.S. Case No. 588 of 2025
for the offence under Section 111(2) of the BNS and Sections
8/20(b)(ii)(C), 20(B)iiC, 23(c), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substance Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., recovery of
411.60 Kg of Gaanja has been made from a truck bearing Reg.
No. HR38V2452, which is the subject matter of the present
case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22826 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
present case due to high handedness of police. Total 411.60 Kg
Ganja alleged to be recovered from a truck bearing Reg. No.
HR38V2452. The name of the petitioner has been surfaced in
this case on the basis of confessional statement of another co-
accused person, which is not admissible in the eyes of law.
Admittedly, no contraband has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner rather the entire recovery
has been made from a truck. Learned counsel further submits
that there is no independent material evidence to connect the
petitioner with the seized contraband. A statement has been
made in para 3 of the bail application that petitioner has clean
antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.
6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, this Court is
inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date
of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East
Champaran at Motihari, in connection with Muffasil (Motihari)
P.S. Case No. 588 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22826 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
down under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., as also with the condition
that one of the bailors should be close relative of the petitioner.
(S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
Ankit Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.