Patna High Court
Deepak KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted at this stage and rejected the regular bail application.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Kumar, sought regular bail in an NDPS case alleging possession of 44.28 grams of smack, claiming innocence and procedural lapses in the seizure. He argued that the police did not comply with Section 105 of the BNSS during the seizure and that the quantity was not of commercial scale. The State opposed bail, highlighting six prior criminal cases, three of which involved similar offenses. After hearing both sides, the court found the circumstances insufficient to justify bail at this stage. Consequently, the court rejected the bail application, permitting the petitioner to reapply after six months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of 44.28 grams of smack.
- Whether the seizure complied with Section 105 of the BNSS, affecting the validity of the evidence.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedent, including three similar cases, warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the quantity seized constitutes a commercial quantity that precludes bail.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 105
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(b), 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- drug possession
- procedural violation
- criminal antecedent
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28144 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2026 Thana- BUDDHACOLONY District- Patna
======================================================
Deepak Kumar Son of Dinesh Mandal @ Dinesh Shaw Resident of Lodipur,
Vidyapath Marg, China Kothi, P.S.- Buddha Colony, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with SPL (N.D.P.S.) Case No. 102 of 2026 arising out of
Buddha Colony P.S. Case No. 52 of 2026 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 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, altogether 44.28 grams of
smack were 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28144 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/2
possession of the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are
police personnel and the police has 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
28.01.2026.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal
antecedent of six cases out of which three cases are of similar
nature.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage,
however, he may renew his prayer for bail after six months.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the
petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.