Patna High Court
Deepak RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner was not entitled to bail under the circumstances.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Rai, sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC in a case registered under Sections 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act for alleged involvement in the trade of 12 grams of smokelike material. The prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement of co‑accused Manish Kumar, who claimed that Rai, along with others, participated in the narcotics trade, and on the recovery of 14 sachets of the substance and Rs.1,400 from the co‑accused. The petitioner contended that the seized contraband and cash were recovered only from Manish Kumar, that his name was falsely implicated, and that there was no direct material linking him to the offence, despite his prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence, the supporting statements of other witnesses, and the petitioner’s three prior NDPS‑related convictions. After considering the confessional statement, corroborative witness statements, and the petitioner’s antecedents, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in view of the allegations under Sections 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act.
- Whether the confessional statement of the co‑accused and the recovery of narcotics from the co‑accused constitute sufficient material to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents, including similar NDPS offences, justify refusal of bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) — s. 438
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(A)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics
- confessional statement
- prior criminal record
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 20(b)(ii)(A) NDPS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23095 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-586 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGWAN BAZAR District- Saran
======================================================
Deepak Rai, aged about 35 years (M), son of Shiv Narayan Rai @ Sita Rai,
Resident Of Village- Daulatganj (near Sinha Lodge), Police Station- Bhagwan
Bazar, Dist- Saran (Chapra)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND
MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b),(ii)
(A) of the NDPS Act.
3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioner along with
other co-accused persons are indulged in trade of mark and on
search of the petitioner and co-accused persons, 14 sachet of
smack, like material weighing about 12 grams along with cash
of Rs.1400/- of different denomination were recovered from the
petitioner and other accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23095 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
submits that the alleged smack and cash of Rs.1400/- were
recovered from the possession of co-accused Manish Kumar and
not this petitioner. He next submits that his name has been
figured by apprehended co-accused Manish Kumar and except
to this, there is no any cogent material against the petitioner
showing his involvement in the allege offence. He next submits
that petitioner has got eleven criminal antecedents, in which,
three criminal antecedents are the same nature of the offences
as stated in para-3 of the petition.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that recovery of
smack weighing 12 grams along with cash of Rs.1400 of
different denomination from the co-accused Mnish Kumar and
petitioner was associated with the alleged offence.
6. On perusal of the first information report and
impugned order dated 02.02.2026, it appears that on the basis of
confessional statement of co-accused Manish Kumar told that he
along with the petitioner and one Aksh Kumar are indulged in
trade of contraband narcotics and total 12 grams of smack, like,
material wrapped in 14 sachet were recovered from co- accused
Manish Kumar who is associate with this petitioner and
informant in his statement recorded at para no.5 of the case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23095 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
diary has supported the case of the prosecution case and several
other witnesses in their statements recorded at para nos.6 and 91
have also supported the case of the prosecution and total eleven
criminal antecedents and three cases are same nature of the
offence as also the fact that this is a very serious nature of the
offence, so I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Brajesh Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.