Patna High Court
Manoj MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The anticipatory bail petition is dismissed as the petitioner is prima facie found to be under a culpable mental state under Section 35 of the NDPS Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Manoj Mandal, was named in an FIR for alleged involvement in a drug offence under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, based on information from co-accused Anita Devi and Sugni Devi who claimed he supplied contraband for delivery to Delhi. The petitioner argued that the allegations were merely speculative, stemming from village enmity, and that no contraband was found in his possession. The State contended that the petitioner was in regular contact with the co-accused via specific mobile numbers, indicating a culpable mental state under Section 35 of the NDPS Act. The court examined the prima facie evidence of communication and concluded that the petitioner appeared to have the requisite mens rea for the offence. Consequently, the court rejected the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the NDPS Act.
- Whether the petitioner was under a culpable mental state as required under Section 35 of the NDPS Act.
- Whether the mere disclosure by co-accused and telephone contacts constitute sufficient material to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(B), 35, 8
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- anticipatory bail
- culpable mental state
- Section 35
- drug trafficking
- Section 8
- Section 20(b)(ii)(B)
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41791 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2026 Thana- BHAGALPUR RAIL P.S. District-
Bhagalpur
======================================================
Manoj Mandal S/O- Chhathu Mandal R/O Vill.- Ward No.-4 Chotti Parbatta,
P.S.- Imilepur, District- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajive Ranjan Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending his arrest in connection with BGP GRPS
P.S. Case No. 61 of 2026 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act.
3. As per FIR total of 6.099 kg of Ganja was
recovered from two apprehended co-accused persons
namely, Anita Devi and Sugni Devi, who upon arrest at
Bhagalpur police station disclosed the name of this
petitioner, who provided contraband to them as to
deliver the same at Delhi. The mobile number of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41791 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
petitioner was supplied by apprehended co-accused
persons as 7654782059 and 887752065.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner that merely on the basis of
suspicion arising out of disclosure made by apprehended
co-accused person, the petitioner was implicated with
alleged recovery of contraband. It is submitted that
petitioner is the co-villager of apprehended co-accused
person and out of local village enmities, he was
implicated without having any cogent material. It is
submitted that admittedly recovery of contraband was
not made from the conscious possession of this
petitioner. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of
bail submitted that this petitioner was in regular touch
with apprehended co-accused person namely, Anita Devi
and Sugni Devi through mobile numbers 7654782059
and 887752065 as to deliver the contraband at Delhi. It
is submitted that factual aspect of this case is sufficient
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41791 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
to suggest that petitioner was under culpable mental
state in view of section 35 of NDPS Act qua seized
contraband from co-accused person.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and
by taking note of fact as petitioner prima-facie found
indulged in conversations with apprehended co-accused
person qua delivery of contraband at Delhi, accordingly,
it can be gathered prima-facie that the petitioner was
under culpable mental state qua possession of
contraband by apprehended co-accused person in view
of section 35 of NDPS Act as discussed aforesaid,
accordingly, the prayer of anticipatory bail of petitioner
stands rejected.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Sudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.