Patna High Court
Rajesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that despite the allegations being based on suspicion, the petitioners are entitled to bail as no material recovery was made from them and the case is prima facie weak, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) CrPC.
Summary
Petitioners Rajesh Kumar and Mahendra Manjhi were named in an FIR for alleged offences under Sections 8, 15, 18(c) and 25 of the NDPS Act relating to the destruction of illegally cultivated opium plants in a forest area of Gaya district. They contended that they are simple farmers with no involvement in the forest cultivation and that the FIR was based merely on the suspicion of a forest range officer, with no seizure made from their homes. The State opposed their bail, arguing the suspicion indicated prima‑facie involvement. The Court noted the lack of material recovery from the petitioners and the fact that a co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail, and therefore ordered their release on bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The bail bond was set at Rs. 10,000 with two sureties each.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the NDPS Act when the FIR alleges involvement solely on the basis of suspicion.
- Whether the absence of any seizure from the petitioners' premises justifies granting bail.
- Whether parity with a co‑accused who obtained bail is a relevant factor in deciding the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) — s. 482(2)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 15, 18(c), 25, 8
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- opium cultivation
- anticipatory bail
- suspicion
- forest land
- bail conditions
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36758 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2025 Thana- DHANGAI District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Rajesh Kumar S/O Karu Yadav R/O Village- Chordaha, P.S- Dhangai,
District- Gaya.
2. Mahendra Manjhi S/O Baleshar Manjhi R/O Village- Chordaha, P.S-
Dhangai, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinod Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending their arrest in connection with Dhangai P.S. Case
No. 23 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 8, 15, 18(c) and 25 of the NDPS Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, a team was
constituted for the destruction of cultivated opium plant in
Chordaha reserved forest land and accordingly 5.36 acres of
illegal cultivation of opium were destroyed over different plots. A
sample of opium plant was recovered and seizure list was
prepared accordingly. It is further alleged that
accused/petitioners along with other co-accused persons, who
belong to another place, were suspected to be engaged in illegal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36758 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
cultivation of opium.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that the alleged place of occurrence, where
the opium plant were cultivated, is in the forest area. The
petitioners are the simple farmers of their villages and they have
no concern at all with the said forest land or premises or any
cultivation of opium plant in the said area. The forest area is
heavily guarded by the forest officers, but since the illegal
cultivation of poppy came to the knowledge of general-public, the
petitioners were made accused merely on the basis of suspicion in
the present case by the informant. The informant is a Forest
Range Officer and he has not named any forest officials, after
being informed that the poppy plants were being cultivated in the
forest area, as it appears from the FIR. It is submitted that
similarly situated co-accused has already granted anticipatory bail
by learned Co-ordinate Bench through Cr. Misc. No. 87034 of
2025 dated 28.01.2026 and as such petitioners also deserves
bail on the ground of parity. Petitioners claimed clean
antecedents.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual and legal submission
and by taking note of fact as allegation made in FIR regarding
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36758 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
involvement in the alleged offence of cultivation of poppy plants
in the forest area appears suspicious, where no recovery has
been made from the house of the petitioners, coupled with fact
the petitioners have been made accused in the present case
prima-facie on the basis of suspicion, accordingly both above-
named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before
the court below within a period of four weeks, are directed to be
released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned CJM-cum Special Judge NDPS Act,
Gayaji/concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection
with Dhangai P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.