Patna High Court
Md. Yusuf SiddiquiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and infringe Article 21, notwithstanding the nature of the NDPS offence.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Yusuf Siddiqui, sought regular bail in a case under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, where contraband exceeding commercial quantity had been seized and an embargo under Section 37 was in place. An earlier bail application was rejected, but the petitioner argued that no cognizance had been taken, he had been in custody since May 2025, had no prior criminal record, and that prolonged pre‑trial detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offence. The court considered that continued detention would amount to punitive pre‑trial incarceration contrary to the spirit of Article 21 and therefore granted bail. Bail was ordered on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of family surety, regular appearance, and possible cancellation on default.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act despite seizure of contraband beyond commercial quantity and an embargo under Section 37.
- Whether prolonged pre‑trial detention without trial violates the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the court has taken cognizance of the offence for the purpose of bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(c), 37
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 21(c)
- Section 37
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- fundamental rights
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2525 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2025 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Md. Yusuf Siddiqui S/O Md. Akhatar Miyan @ Md. Akhatar R/O Vill.-
Majorganj, Ward No. 13, P.S.- Majorganj, District- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Prabhat, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Majorganj P.S. Case No. 201 of 2025 instituted for the offence
under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act. Earlier vide order dated
10.11.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 51056 of 2025, regular bail
of the petitioner was rejected by this Court, taking into account
the recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity coupled
with embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner. It is mainly submitted that even cognizance is not
taken in the present case, hitherto. It has been submitted on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2525 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
2/3
behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since
28.05.2025, having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel
further submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being
concluded in the near future. Learned counsel goes on to submit
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 is reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court
in plethora of judgments.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, period of custody of 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.
6. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Majorganj P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2525 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026
3/3
No. 201 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…