Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. RajaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, directing him to furnish a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Raja, was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for allegedly possessing 18.11 grams of 'smack'. He contended that he was falsely implicated, that no contraband was actually recovered from him, and that the police failed to comply with procedural requirements under Sections 50, 42 of the NDPS Act and Section 105 of the BNSS during seizure. The State opposed bail, citing a prior criminal antecedent. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court found merit in the petitioner's arguments and ordered that he be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Special Judge. The bail order was directed to be implemented in the pending Sadar P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to a person accused under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act for possession of 18.11 grams of narcotic substance.
  • Whether non‑compliance with Sections 50, 42 of the NDPS Act and Section 105 of the BNSS by the police affects the grant of bail.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • drug possession
  • procedural lapse
  • seizure
  • surety
  • criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26761 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2026 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Raja Son of Lal Mohammad Resident of Kabristan Tola, Zero Mile, P.S.-
                 Sadar, District- Purnea

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Md Fazle Karim, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Sadar P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from

                   the possession of the petitioner, 18.11 grams of smack 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. Police have not complied with

                   Sections 50 and 42 of the N.D.P.S. He also submits that the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26761 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     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 the alleged recovery of

                     contraband is though more than small quantity but is much less

                     than    commercial         quantity.     Moreover,   the   petitioner   is

                     languishing in judicial custody since 18.01.2026.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner has criminal

                     antecedent of one case.

                                  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 Special

                     Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Purnea in connection with Sadar P.S. Case

                     No. 34 of 2026.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

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.