Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Aurangjeb khanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The court held that no fresh ground existed to grant bail and therefore the bail petition was dismissed.

Summary

The petitioner, Aurangjeb Khan, was arrested in connection with a NDNDPS case involving the alleged possession of contraband beyond commercial quantity. He applied for regular bail, citing his prolonged judicial custody since November 2024 and pointing to the grant of bail to a co‑accused in a similar case. The court noted its earlier order rejecting bail on the basis of the large quantity of narcotics recovered and the need to expedite trial. The State opposed the bail, arguing there were no new grounds to revisit the earlier decision. Finding no fresh material to justify a change in stance, the court again denied bail and directed the lower court to fast‑track the trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity
  • Whether any fresh ground exists to entertain a fresh bail application

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • regular bail
  • contraband
  • trial expeditious

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40396 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-504 Year-2024 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Aurangjeb khan Son of Lal babu khan Resident of village - Maduaha, P.S.-
                 Nautan, District- West Champaran.
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   19-06-2026               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State.

                             2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Paharpur

                   P.S. Case No. 504 of 2024 (NDPS Case No. 59 of 2025)

                   instituted for the offences under Sections 111(3) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 8, 20(b)(ii)(C),

                   23(C), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

                             3. Earlier, vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in Cr.

                   Misc. No. 67677 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was

                   rejected by this Court considering the recovery of contraband

                   beyond commercial quantity with direction to the learned court

                   below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously.

                             4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 13.11.2024
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40396 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026
                                                       2/2




                     without any rhymes or reason. He further submits that co-

                     accused Ravi Kumar Dubey @ Rabi Dube has been granted

                     regular bail by this Bench vide order dated 05.08.2025 passed in

                     Criminal Miscellaneous No. 22105 of 2025.

                              5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                     grant of bail.

                              6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition

                     of the petitioner.

                               7. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the

                     petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to

                     expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.