Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Afroj MansuriversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to monetary sureties and conditions of appearance and non‑interference.

Summary

Afroj Mansuri was arrested after a police check on a Scorpio vehicle that yielded 1.7 kg of ganja, a pistol, a live cartridge and 2.5 litres of liquor. He was charged under Sections 317(5) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and Sections 8, 20(B)IIB and 29 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner contended that he was merely a passenger, had no knowledge of the contraband, and that the seized quantity was below commercial levels, making Section 37 of the NDPS Act inapplicable. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s two prior convictions. The court, noting that the quantity was only marginally above the small‑quantity threshold and considering the period of custody, granted bail subject to monetary sureties and strict conditions on appearance and non‑interference with evidence or witnesses.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the nature of the offences and the quantity of narcotics and arms seized
  • Whether the quantity of contraband falls within the ‘small quantity’ category under the NDPS Act, affecting bail considerations

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Narcotics
  • Arms possession
  • NDPS Act
  • Criminal procedure
  • Quantity of contraband
  • False implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5059 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2025 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan
                 ======================================================
                 Afroj Mansuri Son of Saheb Hussain @ Sahib Husain R/o Village- Jagatpur
                 Bangra, P.S.- Lakdinaviganj, District- Siwan, Bihar
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Nityanand Mishra, Advocate
                                                 Mr.Sachin Raj, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Meena Singh, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Pachrukhi P.S. Case No. 397 of 2025, instituted for the offences

                   under Sections 317(5), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,

                   2023, u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, u/s

                   25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and u/s 8, 20(B)IIB and

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

                                3. Prosecution case, in short, is that 1.7 kg of Ganja,

                   one country made pistol, one live cartridge and 2.5 litres of

                   liquor has been recovered from the Scorpio. The petitioner was

                   arrested on the spot.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5059 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
                                            2/3




          Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Petitioner is in

          custody since 30.08.2025 and has two criminal antecedents.

          There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against

          the petitioner. No incriminating material has been recovered

          from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel

          further submitted that the petitioner was neither owner nor

          driver of the vehicle, he has only taken lift in the said vehicle

          and he has no knowledge regarding the nature of goods loaded

          on the vehicle. The recovered contraband is below commercial

          quantity, and hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not

          applicable in the present case. There is no compliance of

          Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, recovered contraband being just above the small

          quantity as also the period of custody undergone by the

          petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                       7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court

          below/concerned Court in connection with Pachrukhi P.S. Case
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5059 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     No. 397 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:

                                   (I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or

                     close member.

                                   (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                     fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two

                     consecutive dates without sufficient cause.

                                   (III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the

                     prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during

                     the course of trial.

                                   In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,

                     the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the

                     petitioner.



                                           (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…

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