Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Prakash Kumar Paswan @ Prakash Kumar @ Prakash PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs 10,000, two sureties and conditions of personal appearance.

Summary

Petitioner Prakash Kumar Paswan was arrested for alleged possession of 16 g of a narcotic (smack) and charged under Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 25(1‑Ba), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act. The petitioner contended that the seizure was false, the search violated Section 50 of the NDPS Act, and the quantity involved was only a little over the statutory ‘small quantity’. He also pointed out that co‑accused in the same case had been granted regular bail by the same court. The State opposed bail. Considering the small quantity, the alleged procedural lapse, and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of family surety and personal appearance in court.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the alleged possession of 16 g of narcotic under the NDPS Act and related offences.
  • Whether the alleged violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and the claim of false recovery affect the bail decision.
  • Whether the small‑quantity exception and the grant of bail to co‑accused warrant bail in this case.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • small quantity
  • search and seizure
  • Arms Act
  • criminal procedure
  • narcotic possession

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72734 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-429 Year-2025 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR District-
                                                       Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Prakash Kumar Paswan @ Prakash Kumar @ Prakash Paswan S/O
                 Shivchandar Paswan @ Shivchandra Paswan R/O Vill.- Vasuchak @
                 Bashuchak, P.S.- Saraiya, Dist.- Muzaffarpur, Bihar

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar Patna

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
                                          :     Mr. Mukund Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                   2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for

                   the offence punishable under Sections 111 of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 25(1-B)a/26/35 of the Arms Act

                   and Section 8(c), 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

                                   3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation

                   against the petitioner is that 16 gram of smack was recovered

                   from his possession.

                                   4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

                   that a false recovery of 16 gram of smack like substance has

                   been shown from Hero motorcycle of which the petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72734 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
                                            2/3




          not the owner. It has further been submitted that the search and

          seizure has also been conducted in violation of Section 50 of

          the N.D.P.S. Act and the recovered quantity is a little over

          small quantity. Further, the petitioner is in custody since

          19.05.2025 and the charge-sheet has been submitted and it has

          also been pointed out that other co-accused persons have been

          granted the privilege of regular bail by Co-ordinate benches of

          this Court vide order dated 03.12.2025 and 05.02.2026 passed

          in Cr. Misc. No.80755 of 2025 and Cr. Misc. No.484 of 2026

          respectively.

                         5. Learned APP for the State opposed the bail

          petition.

                         6. Taking into consideration the facts and

          circumstances and considering the recovery of quantity which

          is just a little over small quantity, coupled with the fact that the

          co-accused persons have been granted privilege of regular bail

          by Co-ordinate benches of this Court, let the above named

          petitioner, be released on bail 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 Exclusive Special

          Court-II (N.D.P.S.), Muzaffarpur/concerned Court below in

          connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.95 of 2025 arising out of
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72734 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
                                                          3/3




                        Sadar P.S. Case No. 429 of 2025 subject to condition that:-

                                (i) One of the bailors will be his family member or relatives.
                                (ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in court on
                                each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on
                                two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail
                                bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court
                                concerned.


                                                      (Soni Shrivastava, J)

anand/-

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.