Patna High Court
Anil Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, holding that the lack of possession and procedural irregularities justified release on bail despite the NDPS charges.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Kumar Yadav, sought bail for alleged offences under Sections 20(B)(ii)(C), 23(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, after 88.7 kg of ganja was reportedly seized from his poultry farm. He contended that he was not in possession of the farm, which had been rented to Munna Yadav, and that the police failed to comply with Section 105 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act during the seizure. The State opposed bail, highlighting three prior criminal cases against the petitioner. After hearing both sides, the Court found the procedural lapse and lack of direct possession sufficient to justify bail despite the antecedents. Consequently, the Court ordered the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in an NDPS case where the alleged contraband was seized from premises owned but not possessed by the accused.
- Whether non‑compliance with Section 105 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act vitiates the seizure and warrants bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 105
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(B)(ii)(C), 23(C), 29
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- seizure
- possession
- procedural lapse
- prior criminal antecedent
- rental agreement
- poultry farm
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25689 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-491 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Anil Kumar Yadav S/O Bihari Yadav R/O Village- Chargaha, P.S-Turkauliya ,
District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 02-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 20(B)(ii) (C), 23(C) and 29 of
the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the
poultry farm of this petitioner, altogether 88.7 kg of ganja was
recovered.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also
submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of
the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are police
personnel and the police have not complied with Section 105 of
the BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25689 of 2026(3) dt.02-07-2026
2/2
though the poultry farm belongs to the petitioner, the same was
given on rent to one Munna Yadav vide an agreement dated
14.02.2024. He also submits that as the petitioner has handed over
the poultry farm to Munna Yadav on rent, he is not concerned in
any way with the said poultry farm; only ownership of the poultry
farm is with him, whereas possession is with Munna Yadav. He
lastly submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody
since 10.10.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner has got criminal
antecedent of three cases.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions
Judge/ Special Judge, East Champaran at Motihari in connection
with N.D.P.S. G.R. Case No. 141 of 2025 arising out of
Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 491 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.