Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Kumar SaoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner on condition of a Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, a driver of an auto, was charged under Sections 8(c), 21, 22(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of intoxicating injections recovered from a bag in the vehicle. The prosecution alleged that the contraband was found in the auto, while the defence argued that the seizure list only mentioned items recovered from a different location and that there was no description of any seizure from the auto. The petitioner claimed innocence, no prior criminal record, and was in judicial custody since 12 April 2026. The State opposed bail, but the court, after considering the lack of direct evidence linking the driver to the drugs, decided to enlarge bail. The court ordered the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

Issues considered

  • Whether the driver of the auto can be granted bail under the NDPS Act despite the alleged presence of narcotics in the vehicle.
  • Whether the prosecution has established sufficient evidence linking the petitioner to the contraband.
  • Whether the seriousness of the offences under Sections 8(c), 21, 22(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act precludes bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • drug possession
  • driver liability
  • judicial custody
  • seizure of contraband

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40416 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-110 Year-2026 Thana- Chitragupta Nagar District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Kumar Sao Son of Gopal Sao Resident of village-
                 Hanuman Nagar, Ward no. 44, Ps- Patrakar Nagar, Dist- Patna

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-06-2026                   At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks

                   permission to delete the name of opposite party no. 2.

                                2. Prayer is accorded.

                                3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                4. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Chitragupta Nagar P.S. Case No. 110 of 2026 registered for

                   the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 21, 22(c), 25 and 29

                   of the N.D.P.S. Act.

                                5. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that two

                   persons were riding on the auto and the petitioner is the driver

                   and on the back seat, a person who was sitting with whom, a

                   bag was there and from that bag, intoxicating injections were

                   recovered.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40416 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
                                            2/3




                       6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that

          though it is alleged in the FIR that intoxicant injections in huge

          quantity was recovered but from perusal of the seizure list, it

          transpires that the seizure list has been made only of the

          contraband which were recovered from the Mehta Compound.

          There is no seizure of the alleged auto and even in FIR, there is

          no description as to what was recovered from the auto.

          Petitioner is merely a driver of that auto. Moreover, a statement

          has been made in para-3 of the petition that the petitioner has no

          criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody

          since 12.04.2026.

                       7. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

          for the State.

                       8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

          inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

          petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

          bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

          of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40416 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (NDPS Act), Patna in connection

                      with Chitragupta Nagar P.S. Case No. 110 of 2026.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-

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.