Patna High Court
Bittu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court dismissed the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail.
Summary
Bittu Kumar petitioned for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a narcotics case where 30 litres of codeine were seized and he was implicated through a co-accused's confessional statement. The prosecution alleged offences under Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, and noted the petitioner’s four prior criminal records. The petitioner claimed innocence, while the State opposed bail. The Court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in State by the Inspector of Police v. B. Ramu (2024), found the circumstances did not merit anticipatory bail. Consequently, the application for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act in view of the alleged involvement and prior criminal antecedents
- Whether the Supreme Court precedent in State by the Inspector of Police v. B. Ramu is applicable to deny anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 111
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- codeine seizure
- criminal antecedents
- Section 111 BN S
- Section 21(c) NDPS
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23901 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2026 Thana- Chitragupta Nagar District- Khagaria
======================================================
Bittu Kumar S/o Umesh Paswan Resident of Village-Lohianagar
Parmanandpur, P.S.- Chitragupta Nagar, District-Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amit Prakash, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Chitraguptanagar P.S. Case No. 01/2026
(NDPS Spl. Case No. 03/2026) dated 03.01.2026 for the
offences punishable under Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 21(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act
3. As per the prosecution case, 30 litres of codeine
has been recovered from the petitioner.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in this case. It is next submitted that the name
of the petitioner has come in the confessional statement of the
co-accused. Petitioner has four criminal antecedents.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23901 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026
2/2
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts as well as in
light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of State by the Inspector of Police vs. B. Ramu reported in
2024 SCC Online SC 4073, I am not inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.