Patna High Court
Samsher Alam @ Md. Samsher AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner, finding the seriousness of the offence and his prior antecedents outweigh the arguments for release.
Summary
The petitioner, Samsher Alam, applied for bail in a case under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, where 23 grams of illicit smack were recovered from three co‑accused. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating that no contraband was found in his possession and that the co‑accused’s allegation that the drugs were purchased from him lacked evidentiary value. The court noted that the seized quantity was below the commercial threshold, rendering Section 37 of the NDPS Act inapplicable, but also observed that the petitioner has five prior criminal antecedents of a similar nature. While other co‑accused had been granted bail, the court considered the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s criminal record. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, with the trial court directed to expedite the trial and the petitioner allowed to file a fresh bail petition after six months if the trial remains pending.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under the NDPS Act given the low quantity of drugs and lack of possession evidence.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(b), 37, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- drug possession
- prior criminal antecedents
- quantity below commercial threshold
- anticipatory bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69575 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-278 Year-2024 Thana- Marnga District- Purnia
======================================================
Samsher Alam @ Md. Samsher Alam S/O Md. Alijan Resident of Village-
Bengali Tola, Satsang Bihar, P.S- Maranga, Dist.- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Spl. Case
No. 187 of 2024, arising out of Maranga P.S. Case No. 278 of
2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 8(c) and 21(b)
of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. Prosecution case in brief is that the Police has
recovered total 23 grams of illicit smack (brown sugar) from the
possession of three accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged
against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case.
He further submits that earlier vide order dated 04.04.2025
passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 21279 of 2025, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69575 of 2025(3) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was rejected by
this Court. He further submits that no incriminating article has
been recovered from the conscious or physical possession of the
petitioner. Apprehended co-accused persons have disclosed the
name of the petitioner and have stated that the smack in
question was purchased from the petitioner, though the same has
no evidentiary value in the eye of law. The recovered
contraband is below the commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37
of the NDPS Act is not applicable in the present case. The
petitioner bears five criminal antecedents, as per disclosure
made in paragraph No.3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in
custody since 28.06.2025. Other co-accused from whom
recovery was made have been granted regular bail by this Court
vide orders dated 05-02-2025 & 13-02-2025, passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 4554 of 2025 & Cr. Misc. No. 6277 of 2025, respectively.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
grant of bail. He further submitted that petitioner has five
criminal antecedent of similar nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, nature and gravity of offence and also taking into
consideration five criminal antecedents of similar nature, this
Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69575 of 2025(3) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
9. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew
the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the trial is
not concluded within a period of six months from today. If any
such application is filed before the learned court below, the
court concerned shall consider the same on its own merit
without being prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…