Patna High Court
Amardeep Kumar @ B. C.versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and specific conditions.
Summary
Amardeep Kumar was arrested in connection with a case under sections 21(a) and 22 of the NDPS Act after 5.50 grams of brown sugar was recovered from his possession. The petitioner argued that the recovery violated mandatory search‑seizure provisions and that the quantity constituted a 'small quantity' well below commercial levels. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents under the Drugs and Cosmetic Act and the NDPS Act, although the petitioner claimed he was already on bail in those matters. The Court considered the small quantity, alleged procedural lapses, and the petitioner’s willingness to cooperate, and ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding presence in court and disclosure of any further NDPS accusations. The bail order was conditioned on a family member acting as one surety and allowed cancellation if conditions were breached.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in an NDPS case involving a small quantity of narcotic substance.
- Whether alleged violations of search and seizure provisions affect the grant of bail.
- Impact of the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents on bail eligibility.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21(a), 22
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- small quantity
- search and seizure
- criminal antecedents
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6208 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2025 Thana- ISHAKCHAK District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Amardeep Kumar @ B. C. S/o Thakur Das Resident of Village- Bhikhan
Gumti No. 2 Near Raily Line, P.S.- Ishakchak, Dist.- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajive Ranjan Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Ishakchak P.S. Case no.260 of
2025 registered under sections 21(a) and 22 of NDPS Act.
3. There is a recovery of 5.50 grams of brown sugar
from petitioner’s possession.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a
false recovery of 5.50 grams of brown sugar has been made
from petitioner’s possession, however, the same has been done
in violation of mandatory provisions of search and seizure.
Further, the recovered quantity is just over small quantity and
much below than commercial quantity. The petitioner is in
custody since 11.10.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6208 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
case/trial. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State on the ground that petitioner has criminal
antecedents, one of which is under the Drugs and Cosmetic Act
and NDPS Act. In response, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that he is on bail in the said cases.
6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that
recovered quantity is just over small quantity and much below
than commercial quantity, the petitioner is directed to be
enlarged on bail in connection with Ishakchak P.S. Case no.260
of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court concerned where the case is
pending/successor Court, subject to the following conditions:-
(I) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be the
family member/close relative of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
the learned trial Court on each date and shall cooperate in the
trial. In case the petitioner is absent on the two consecutive
dates without sufficient reasons, the learned trial Court would be
at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6208 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
(III) It is made clear that in the event the petitioner is
found to be an accused in any other case under the NDPS Act,
and such fact is brought to the notice of the concerned Cour, the
Court concerned would proceed to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner in the present case as well.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.