Patna High Court
Muneshwar Mahto @ Mungeshwar YdversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner should be released on bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
Muneshwar Mahto sought bail in a case registered under Sections 8(b), 18 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act for alleged involvement in an opium plantation that was destroyed on 24‑12‑2022. The FIR lodged on 26‑12‑2022 implicated him merely because he was found near the site two days after the destruction, with no material recovered from him. The petitioner argued that he had a clean antecedent and that a co‑accused, Arjun Yadav, had already been granted anticipatory bail in a similar case. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, noting the lack of any recovery from the petitioner and the precedent of bail to the co‑accused, ordered his release on bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail/anticipatory bail despite the FIR under the NDPS Act.
- Whether the absence of material recovery and clean antecedent justify bail.
- Whether the precedent of bail granted to a similarly situated co‑accused is applicable.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 18, 29, 8(b)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- opium plantation
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30983 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2022 Thana- BHADHWAR District- Gaya
======================================================
Muneshwar Mahto @ Mungeshwar Yd, S/o Baudh Mahto, R/o Village -
Bichali Tand, P.S - Bhadawar, District – Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Bhadawar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2022, registered
for the offence punishable under Sections 8(b), 18 and 29 of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
3. Some alleged illegal opium plantation has been
destroyed by the staff of the Narcotic Department on
24.12.2022. The FIR has been lodged on 26.12.2022 implicating
the petitioner, as he was found to be in the vicinity of the place,
where earlier opium was being grown.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that from the allegations itself it is
obvious that neither the petitioner was there at the time the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30983 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
alleged opium plantation was discovered and destroyed nor there
is any recovery from the petitioner. His subsequent implication is
only because he was near the place two days after the
occurrence. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-
accused, namely, Arjun Yadav has been granted bail by one of
the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court through Cr. Misc. No.
29532 of 2023 dated 14.07.2023. Petitioner claimed clean
antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as their being no allegation of any recovery
from the petitioner and as similarly situated co-accused has
already been granted anticipatory bail as mentioned above,
accordingly, above named petitioner, who is a man of clean
antecedent in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
learned trial Court, within a period of four weeks of the order, is
directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned I/c Sessions
Judge-cum-Spl. Judge, NDPS Act, Gaya Ji/concerned Court,
where the case is pending in connection with Bhadwar P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30983 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
No. 39 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further conditions:-
(i) That one of the bailors will be a
close relative of the petitioner who will give
an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is
related with the petitioner. The bailor will also
undertake to inform the court if there is any
change in the address of the petitioner.
(ii) That the petitioner will be well
represented on each date and if he fails to do
so on two consecutive dates, his bail bond will
be liable to be cancelled.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.