Patna High Court
Vijay SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case for pre‑arrest bail and therefore granted it.
Summary
Vijay Singh and Bajrangi Singh were accused under Sections 8(B) and 18 of the NDPS Act for allegedly cultivating opium on protected forest land in Gaya district. They applied for pre‑arrest bail, claiming innocence, lack of material evidence, and a clean antecedent, and pointed to earlier orders releasing similarly situated co‑accused on bail. The State opposed the bail, relying on the suspicion arising from the FIR. The Court held that mere suspicion cannot substitute for proof and, noting the absence of any recovery from the petitioners’ homes and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, found a prima facie case for bail. Accordingly, the petitioners were directed to be released on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of their criminal antecedent and compliance with Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted to persons accused under Sections 8(B) and 18 of the NDPS Act for alleged opium cultivation on protected forest land.
- Whether suspicion alone, without material evidence, is sufficient to deny bail under the NDPS Act.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 18, 8(B)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- NDPS Act
- opium cultivation
- protected forest land
- suspicion vs proof
- bail under CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45150 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2025 Thana- BHADHWAR District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Vijay Singh (Aged about- 39 Years, Male) S/o Maheshwar Singh @
Maheshar Singh
2. Bajrangi Singh ( aged about 68 Years, Male) S/o Manijar Singh
Both Resident of Village- Ratnaag, P.S.- Naudiha Bazar, District- Palamu
(Jharkhand)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Union of India through the Narcotic Commissioner, New Delhi New
Delhi
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the UOI : Mrs. Ranjana Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Renu Kumari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners; Mrs. Ranjana Sinha,
learned counsel for the Union of India and Mrs. Renu Kumari,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Bhadwar P.S. Case No. 11 of 2025, registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 8(B) and 18 of the N.D.P.S.
Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioners
along with other co-accused persons, were allegedly involved in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45150 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
cultivation of opium on the protected forest land. The raiding
team had destroyed 8.81 acres of illegal cultivation of opium
over different plots. A sample of opium plant was recovered and
seizure list was prepared accordingly.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
falsely been implicated in the present case. The alleged place of
occurrence, where the opium plant were cultivated, is in the
forest area. The informant is a police officer and he has not
named any forest officials, after being informed that the opium
plants were being cultivated in the forest area, as it appears from
the FIR. He further submitted that other similarly situated co-
accused persons have already been released on bail by a co-
ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.07.2025 passed
in Criminal Miscellanous No. 39819 of 2025 and order dated
26.11.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 46778 of
2025. No material has been collected against the petitioners.
Petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds, petitioners
seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45150 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
of the parties, as well as, the fact that alleged place of
occurrence, where the opium plant were cultivated, is in the
forest area. No recovery has been made from the house of the
petitioner and the petitioner has been made accused in the
present case on the basis of suspicion, the law is well settled in
this regard that a strong suspicion, howsoever, cannot take the
place of proof and for suspicion and under-trial cannot be kept
behind the bar, even after completion of investigation. Similarly
situated co-accused persons have already been released on bail
by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
09.07.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellanous No. 39819 of 2025
and order dated 26.11.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous
No. 46778 of 2025. Petitioners have clean antecedent. I am of
the opinion that petitioners have, prima facie, made out a case to
be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on 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 District Court
where the case is pending, in connection with Bhadwar P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45150 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
Case No. 11 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioners as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…