Patna High Court
Shekhar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail, holding that the prosecution’s failure to file the charge‑sheet within the statutory period without seeking an extension entitled the accused to default bail.
Summary
Shekhar Singh was arrested for alleged possession of 38.183 kg of ganja under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c) and 20 of the NDPS Act. He petitioned for regular bail, claiming innocence and highlighting procedural defects: the seizure list was not prepared under Section 105 of the BNSS, the charge‑sheet was filed without the required forensic laboratory (FSL) report, and no extension under Section 37(a) was sought despite the charge‑sheet being filed after the 180‑day statutory period. The petitioner also emphasized his clean antecedent and that he had been in judicial custody since 16‑Oct‑2025. The court, relying on its earlier judgments (Cr. Misc. No. 84487/2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 65898/2023) interpreting the default‑bail provision of Section 36(a) sub‑clause 4 of the NDPS Act, held that the prosecution’s failure to comply with the statutory timeline entitled the accused to bail. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the petitioner on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the accused is entitled to default bail under Section 36(a) sub‑clause 4 of the NDPS Act when the charge‑sheet is not filed within 180 days and no extension is obtained.
- Whether the absence of a seizure list compliant with Section 105 of the BNSS and the lack of an FSL report invalidate the charge‑sheet and justify bail.
- Whether bail can be granted despite the alleged possession of a commercial quantity of narcotics.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (BNSS) Act — s. 105
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 — s. 20, 20(b)(ii)(c), 36(a) sub‑clause 4, 37(a), 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- default bail
- charge‑sheet delay
- procedural lapse
- seizure list
- FSL report
- commercial quantity narcotics
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41215 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1021 Year-2025 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar
======================================================
Shekhar Singh Son of Late Nand Lal Singh Resident of village - Larkaniya
Tola, P.S.- Katihar Town, District - Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate
Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Raghvendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8/20(b)(ii)
(c)/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (in
short ‘NDPS’) Act, 1985.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is from the
possession of this petitioner altogether, 38.183 kg of ganja was
recovered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned
counsel for the petitioner has submitted that nothing has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41215 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
recovered from the possession of this petitioner. Learned
counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the
witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and they have
not complied Section 105 of the BNSS while preparing the
seizure list. In this case, police have filed charge sheet without
the FSL report and even learned trial court has taken cognizance
without the FSL report which is apparent from the
supplementary affidavit wherein the certified copy of the order
sheet of the learned trial court has been filed. A statement has
been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no
criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial
custody since 16.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied
on an order of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 84487 of 2024
and in that order, this court has relied on an order of the learned
co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 65898
of 2023 wherein the learned co-ordinate Bench has opined that
from reading of Section 36(a) sub-clause 4 of the NDPS Act, it
appears that in the case of offence punishable under Section 19
or Section 24 or Section 27(a) or for offences involving
commercial quantity, the charge-sheet can be submitted within
180 days and if the charge-sheet is not submitted within 180
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41215 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
days, the accused person is entitled for default bail. The proviso
to Section 37(a) speaks that public prosecutor may take an
extension of time for filing the charge-sheet and 180 days time
can be extended for a period up to one year. After the public
prosecutor files that progress report of the investigation and
gives specific reasons for detention of the accused beyond the
said period of 180 days. In the present case, the Special Public
Prosecutor has not filed any application for extension of period
of the charge-sheet and the charge-sheet as per the contention of
the petitioner has been filed without FSL report.
6. 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 released on bail in connection with
Katihar Town P.S. Case No. 1021 of 2025 on furnishing bail
bond of 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned D.A.S.J. III, Katihar.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.