Patna High Court
Tuntun Nutt @ Diwan @ Ashok KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is denied as the petitioner’s alleged participation in a commercial quantity NDPS offence and his prior criminal record justify refusal of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Tuntun Nutt, was implicated in an NDPS case after two co‑accused, caught with 2.513 kg of heroin, alleged that he had asked them to transport the contraband to Bihiya for a payment of Rs 5,000. He filed an application for anticipatory bail, claiming false implication and arguing that the recovery was from the co‑accused, not him. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner’s five prior criminal records, including a pending NDPS case of a similar nature, and the commercial quantity of the seized heroin. The court examined the FIR, the statements of the co‑accused, and the petitioner’s antecedents. Considering the seriousness of the offence, the corroborative testimony of prosecution witnesses, and the petitioner’s criminal history, the court found no sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the NDPS Act given the allegations and his criminal antecedents
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement, as disclosed by co‑accused statements, warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21(c), 27(A), 8(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- heroin
- criminal antecedents
- commercial quantity
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29608 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2025 Thana- NUAOW District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Tuntun Nutt @ Diwan @ Ashok Kumarm aged about 25 years, Gender-Male,
S/o Idrish Nutt, R/o Vill - Teghra, P.S.- Bihian, District.- Bhojpur (Ara)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajkumar Rajesh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND
MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section
8(c)/21(c)/27(A) of the NDPS Act.
3. As per allegation in the FIR, two FIR named
accused persons were caught during routine vehicle checking
who disclosed their names as Rupesh Kumar and Pramod
Kumar and upon the search of the dicky of their motorcycle
bearing registration no. UP 61 BT 8894, total 2.513 kg of heroin
was recovered. Upon inquiry from the above two co-accused
persons, who disclosed that the same recovered contraband were
handed over to them by the petitioner, who asked the co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29608 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
persons to carry to Bihiya.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next
submits that the alleged heroin is said to have been recovered
from other co-accused persons and not this petitioner, whose
name figured on the basis of confessional statement of co-
accused persons and he has not been apprehended on the spot
and the petitioner has got five criminal antecedents and one of
the case stands on same nature of the offence as stated in para-3
of the petition and the alleged recovery of contraband heroin is
of commercial quantity.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of this petitioner and submits that petitioner has
got five criminal antecedents and one of the case pertains to the
same nature of the offence as stated in para-3 of the petition.
6. On perusal of the FIR and impugned order dated
09.01.2026, it appears that petitioner is named in the FIR and
whose name has been disclosed by the two co-accused persons
who were apprehended on the spot and were carrying 2.513 Kg
of heroin in the dicky of their motorcycle. Upon inquiry, it was
revealed that the petitioner asked them to carry the said
contraband to Bihiya for which they were paid Rs. 5000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29608 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
Moreover, petitioner has got five criminal antecedent and one of
the case pertains to the same nature of offence under the NDPS
Act which is pending before the trial Court and several
witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution, so I am
not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
hereby rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Brajesh Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.