Patna High Court
Umesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court allowed the petitioner's application for regular bail, directing his release on bail with conditions.
Summary
Umesh Yadav was arrested in connection with a railway case involving alleged possession of 15 lorazepam tablets and a surgical blade, and was charged under several sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, the NDPS Act and the Railway Act. He filed an application for regular bail, contending that he was falsely implicated, that the seized quantity was only intermediate and not commercial, and that the police had not complied with procedural requirements under Sections 45 and 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 103(4) of the B.N.S. The State opposed the bail. The court noted the length of the petitioner’s custody, the procedural lapses alleged, and the fact that a similarly situated co‑accused had been granted bail. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on regular bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and several conditions, including cooperation with the trial and regular reporting to the police. The application for bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted in a case involving alleged possession of narcotic substances under the NDPS Act and B.N.S.
- Whether the quantity seized constitutes an 'intermediate' rather than a 'commercial' quantity for bail considerations
- Whether procedural lapses under Sections 45, 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 103(4) of the B.N.S. affect the grant of bail
- Whether the precedent of bail granted to a co‑accused is determinative
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103(4), 123, 317(4), 317(5), 3(5), 62
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 22(a), 45, 50, 8(c)
- Railway Act — s. 137, 147
Subjects
- regular bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotic substances
- intermediate quantity
- procedural lapse
- Railway Act
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.728 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2025 Thana- KATIHAR GRP CASE District- Katihar
======================================================
Umesh Yadav Son of Late Kameshwar Yadav R/o Khuskibag, Ward no -42,
P.S. - Kadar, Distt - Purnia.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Katihar Rail P.S. Case
No. 70 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 123, 62, 317(5), 317(4) and 3(5) of
B.N.S and Section 8(c) and 22(a) of NDPS Act and Section 137
and 147 of Railway Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, total 15 tablets of
Lorazepam containing 8102 mg in each tablets and a surgical
blade were recovered from the possession of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.728 of 2026(4) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
the conscious possession of the petitioner. The police did not
follow Sections 45 and 50 of N.D.P.S. Act as well as Section
103(4) of B.N.S. The recovery of the seized articles comes
within the intermediatory quantity and not comes in the purview
of commercial quantity. It is further submitted that this
petitioner is in custody since 07.04.2025 and having two
criminal antecedents. Similarly situated co-accused (Suraj Hadi
@ Suraj Hari) has been granted regular bail by the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.01.2026 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 71298 of 2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
as well as the period of custody of the petitioner, the petitioner
above-named, is directed to be enlarged 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 learned
Court concerned, Katihar in connection with Katihar Rail P.S.
Case No. 70 of 2025, with following conditions:-
(i). Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.728 of 2026(4) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(ii). One of the bailors will be his own blood relation,
preferably father, mother, brother, sister or his wife.
(iii). The bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will
inform the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in
any other case of similar nature after his release in the present
case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate
the proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse.
(iv). If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(v). The petitioner within two weeks after his release
from custody shall appear before the local police station along
with a copy of this order and thereafter shall appear in the first
week of every month to mark his attendance till the framing of
charge in the trial court.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.