Patna High Court
Nayan Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Nayan Kumar Singh, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 111 of the B.N.S. and Sections 8(c), 21(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution alleged that 5.19 kg of brown sugar was recovered from a seized vehicle and was intended for the petitioner. The petitioner contended that no incriminating material was found in his possession and that he was implicated solely on statements of co‑accused persons. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s inclusion in the FIR, the large quantity of narcotics recovered, and his two prior criminal records, one of a similar nature. Considering the specific accusations, seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s antecedents, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 111 of the B.N.S. and the NDPS Act given the facts of the case.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- brown sugar
- narcotics
- criminal antecedents
- Section 111
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56585 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2024 Thana- Mufassil District- Purnia
======================================================
Nayan Kumar Singh S/o Sushant Singh R/o Village- New Sipahi Tola, P.S.-
Madhubani, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 111 of the
B.N.S. and Sections 8(c), 21(c), 25 and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. As per prosecution case, 5.19 Kg brown sugar was
recovered from the dicky of the seized vehicle which was to be
supplied to this petitioner.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. No incriminating article has been
recovered from possession of this petitioner and he has falsely
been implicated in this case merely on the basis of disclosure
made by apprehended co-accused persons.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56585 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/2
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
and huge quantity of brown sugar was recovered from the seized
car which was supposed to be delivered to this petitioner.
Petitioner has got two criminal antecedents out of which one is
of similar nature.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence
and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.