Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vijay Kumar DasversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Bail was not granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Vijay Kumar Das, was arrested on 6 December 2025 after police recovered 9 kg of ganja from him and he was charged under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. He filed a bail application claiming innocence, alleging that the drugs were planted by the police, and highlighted his clean antecedent. The learned counsel for the State opposed bail, emphasizing the large quantity of narcotics involved. Justice Sandeep Kumar, after hearing both sides, was not inclined to grant bail given the seriousness of the offence and the substantial seizure. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed, with the petitioner permitted to approach the court again only if the prosecution causes undue delay in the trial. The order expressly limited its observations to the bail application and did not prejudice the merits of the case.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to a person accused under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act for possession of 9 kg of ganja.
  • Whether the alleged planting of evidence and the petitioner's clean antecedent warrant bail despite the large quantity of narcotics.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • drug possession
  • large quantity
  • presumption of guilt
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25895 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- Bathnaha District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Vijay Kumar Das Son of Mahendra Das Resident of village-Pathardewa PS-
                 Bathnaha Distt- Araria

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Madhav Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Mr.Mohammed Arif, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Bathnaha P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.

                                 3. The petitioner was caught with 9 kg of ganja and is

                   in custody since 06.12.2025.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this

                   case and the ganja is alleged to have been planted by the

                   police. He further submits that the petitioner has clean

                   antecedent.

                                5. Considering the huge recovery of ganja, I am not

                   inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25895 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                                  6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed with

                     liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court if the trial is

                     delayed by the prosecution.

                                  7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made

                     herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail

                     application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at

                     any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express

                     any opinion on the merits of the case.


                                                                          (Sandeep Kumar, J)

P. Kumar

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.