Patna High Court
Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh SinghversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
Bail was granted because the recovery was non‑specific, the petitioners had clean antecedents, and similarly placed co‑accused had already been released on bail.
Summary
The petitioners, Mukesh Kumar and Jitendra Kumar, were arrested in connection with a case involving the manufacture of small quantities of ganja and the seizure of illicit foreign liquor. They sought bail under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, claiming innocence and lack of incriminating material on their persons. The prosecution argued the seriousness of the offence, while the petitioners highlighted their clean antecedents, the non‑specific nature of the recovery, and that similarly situated co‑accused had already been granted bail. The court considered these factors, along with the length of custody and the conditions prescribed under Section 480(3) of the BNSS, and found no compelling reason to deny bail. Consequently, the court ordered the release of both petitioners on bail with specified surety and compliance conditions.
Issues considered
- What factors justify granting bail to accused persons under the NDPS Act and Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act?
- Whether the non‑specific nature of the recovery and clean antecedents warrant bail despite the seriousness of the offence?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments (BNSS) Act — s. 480(3)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(B), 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- drug offence
- illicit liquor
- clean antecedents
- co‑accused bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30472 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2026 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Singh, S/O Late Satyendra Nath Sahay, Resident
of Village - Gulmahiabag, P.S - Didarganj, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 30477 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2026 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Jitendra Kumar, S/o Late Ram Karan Singh @ Karan Singh, Resident of
Village -Gulamchiyabagh, P.S. - Didarganj, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 30472 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shivjee Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Asha Devi, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 30477 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Suresh Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mohammad Sufyan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 Since both the bail petitions arise out of Nadi
(Fathua) P.S. Case No. 82/2026, as such, they have been taken
up together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
3. In the present cases, the petitioners seek bail in
connection with Nadi (Fathua) P.S. Case No. 82/2026, registered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30472 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/4
for the offence under Sections 8, 20(b), (ii) (B) of the NDPS Act
and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
4. As per prosecution case, six persons including these
two petitioners were found making small puriya of ganja. 750
ml. of illicit foreign liquor was also recovered from the said
place. On the disclosure of the apprehended persons, further raid
was made on the gumti of co-accused Kamlesh Rai and further
recovery of ganja was made. In this manner, total 2.193 kg. of
ganja was made from these two places.
5. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners
that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely
implicated in this case. Nothing incriminating has been
recovered from the person/possession of the petitioners. The
recovery has been made from the hut and gumti of co-accused
Kamlesh Rai and the petitioners have no concern with these two
places. It has further been submitted that the weight of ganja
recovered from the petitioners or other co-accused persons
allegedly making puriya has not been disclosed though total
weight of ganja including the quantity seized from the gumti of
co-accused Kamlesh Rai has been mentioned. The petitioners
are having clean antecedents and they are in custody since
03.03.2026. The similarly placed co-accused persons have been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30472 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/4
granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders
dated 05.05.2026 & 06.05.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos.28356
of 2026 & 28978 of 2026, respectively.
6. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the submission
made on behalf of the petitioners.
7. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and
submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the
non-specific nature of recovery from the petitioners and further
considering the period of custody of the petitioners along with
their clean antecedents and also considering grant of bail to the
similarly placed co-accused persons, the petitioners are directed
to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions
Judge/Special Judge (NDPS), Patna/concerned court, in
connection with Nadi (Fathua) P.S. Case No. 82/2026, subject to
the conditions mentioned in Section 480 (3) of BNSS and also
the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors will be a close
relative of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners will remain present on
each and every date fixed by the below, if
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30472 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
4/4
so required by the learned trial court.
(iii) In case of absence on three
consecutive dates or in violation of the
terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioners will be liable to be cancelled
by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.