Patna High Court
Shivnandan Yadav @ Shyam Nandan YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail as a prima facie case exists in his favour.
Summary
Shivnandan Yadav sought anticipatory bail after an FIR alleged that 15‑20 green ganja plants were recovered from an abandoned house purportedly belonging to him, invoking Sections 179, 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 8(c), 20(a)(i) and 29 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that the quantity of cannabis had not been ascertained, the plants could have grown naturally, and he had a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail. The High Court observed that the lack of a precise quantity determination and the possibility of natural growth created reasonable doubt, and the petitioner’s clean antecedent further supported bail. Consequently, the Court directed the District Court to grant anticipatory bail within four weeks, subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and verification of any pending cases, invoking Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in an NDPS case where the exact quantity of narcotic plants is not established and natural growth is plausible.
- Whether a clean criminal antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail despite the seriousness of the alleged offence.
- Whether Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be invoked to secure anticipatory bail in the present circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 179, 3(5)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(a)(i), 29, 8(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotic plants
- quantity not determined
- clean antecedent
- Section 482 CrPC
- bail jurisprudence
- natural growth of cannabis
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30363 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2026 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya
======================================================
Shivnandan Yadav @ Shyam Nandan Yadav S/o Late Ramjatan Yadav R/o
Village - Garari Mathiya, PS - Konch, Dist. - Gayaji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Pushpa Sinha.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms.Pushpa Sinha.1,
learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Konch P.S. Case No. 34/2026 registered under Sections
179, 3(5) of BNS and Sections 8(c), 20(a)(i) and 29 of NDPS
Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, 15–20 green
ganja plants were recovered from an abandoned house allegedly
belonging to the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been
falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that
although a seizure list was prepared, no determination was made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30363 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
regarding the total quantity of ganja allegedly recovered.
Moreover, the possibility that the plants had grown naturally
cannot be ruled out. Learned counsel also submitted that the
petitioner has a clean antecedent. On these grounds, the
petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties and upon perusal of the allegations made in the
FIR, this Court finds that no determination has been made with
regard to the total quantity of ganja allegedly recovered, and the
possibility of the plants having grown naturally cannot, at this
stage, be ruled out. Petitioner has clean antecedent. I am of the
opinion that the petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to
be released on anticipatory bail.
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of his/her arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge - cum-Spl. Judge NDPS
Act, Gayaji in connection with Konch P.S. Case No.34 of 2026,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30363 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 of the
BNSS/438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.