Patna High Court
Arman Mian @ Arman MiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSUL
Holding
Bail was denied because the offence involved a commercial quantity of charas recovered from the accused’s conscious possession.
Summary
Arman Mian was arrested after police stopped his vehicle and recovered 4.6 kg of charas from his possession, leading to charges under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The petitioner applied for bail, claiming innocence, alleging that the contraband was planted and that the charge‑sheet was incomplete because it lacked a forensic science laboratory report. The State opposed bail, emphasizing that the quantity seized constitutes a commercial amount and was found in the petitioner’s conscious possession. The Patna High Court, after hearing arguments via video conference, declined to grant bail, noting the seriousness of the offence and the commercial quantity involved. The Court directed the trial court to expedite the trial and permitted the petitioner to renew his bail application after six months if the trial remained pending.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in an NDPS case where a commercial quantity of narcotic drug has been seized from the accused’s conscious possession.
- Whether the absence of a forensic science laboratory report in the charge‑sheet renders the charge‑sheet defective for the purpose of granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c), 29, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- drug possession
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34110 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUAWA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Arman Mian @ Arman Miya Son of Reyajul Mian, Resident of Village -Sirsia
Kalan, PS -Adapur, District -East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar No. III, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
ORAL ORDER
2 20-05-2026 The matter was heard via video conferencing
mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
N.D.P.S. Case No. 10 of 2026, arising out of Mahuawa P.S.
Case No. 111 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
4. As per prosecution case, during the course of
vehicle checking a vehicle was signaled to stop but the
occupants of the vehicle on seeing the Police tried to flee who
were then apprehended by the Police. A search was conducted
and from the possession of the petitioner 4.6 kg of charas was
recovered which was kept in a black bag.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34110 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
2/3
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The recovery is manufactured and planted. The
chargesheet has been submitted on 31.12.2025 without FSL
report and as such the chargesheet is incomplete in the eye of
law and the matter is pending for consideration before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel lastly submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in custody since
01.09.2025.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that 4.6 kg of charas has been recovered
from the conscious possession of the petitioner which is greater
than the commercial quantity.
7. Considering the nature of offence and the
quantity of recovered contraband which is commercial, this
Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner
stands rejected.
9. Learned trial Court is directed to conclude the
trial expeditiously as delay in trial may entitle the petitioner for
bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34110 of 2026(2) dt.20-05-2026
3/3
10. The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail
after six months if the trial is not concluded.
(Ansul, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.