Patna High Court
Yogendra RautversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail and ordered his release on bail.
Summary
Yogendra Raut was arrested in a case under the NDPS Act where 107.80 kg of ganja was seized from a scorpio vehicle that had met with an accident while attempting to flee. The petitioner contended that he had no possession of the contraband, that the charge‑sheet was filed without the forensic laboratory (FSL) report and without any extension of the statutory 180‑day period, and that he had been in judicial custody since 4 December 2024. He also pointed out that a co‑accused had already been granted bail and relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha that prolonged detention infringes Article 21. The State opposed bail, invoking the statutory embargo under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act. The Court, after considering the delay in filing the charge‑sheet, the absence of an FSL report and the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record, held that the statutory embargo could be overridden by the fundamental right to liberty and granted regular bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under the NDPS Act despite the statutory embargo of Section 37(1)(b).
- Whether the failure to file the charge‑sheet within 180 days and the absence of an FSL report justify default bail under Section 36(a) sub‑clause 4.
- Whether the petitioner’s prolonged pre‑trial detention violates Article 21 of the Constitution.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)C, 22, 23, 27(a), 36(a) sub-clause 4, 37(1)(b), 37(a), 8
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- bail
- default bail
- charge sheet delay
- forensic laboratory report
- Article 21
- fundamental rights
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74187 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-259 Year-2024 Thana- BELA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Yogendra Raut S/O Late Ramchandra Raut R/O Village- Bhishwa , Ward No
-02 , P.S.- Bela , District - Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 16-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under sections 8, 27(a),
20(b)(ii) C, 22 and 23 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant
was on vehicle checking duty at that time, one scorpio vehicle
was coming from the side of bela which was intercepted but the
scorpio met with an accident in an endeavour to flee away from
the place. It is further alleged that two persons started fleeing
away and they were apprehended. Petitioner was also
apprehended. It is alleged that from that scorpio altogether
107.80 kg of ganja was recovered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74187 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
2/4
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has
falsely been implicated in this case. A statement has been made
in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal
antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of
this petitioner. He has also submitted that from perusal of the
seizure list, it will transpire that there is no description regarding
accident of the scorpio rather only a scorpio has written in the
seizure list. It has also been submitted that the raiding party was
not having any kit to examine the contraband at the place of
occurrence. It has also been submitted that from perusal of
charge sheet, it is quite clear that the charge sheet was filed prior
to the FSL report. In this regard, there is an order of this Court
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 65898 of 2023, wherein the Co-ordinate
Bench has opined that from reading of Section 36(a) sub-clause
4 of the NDPS Act, it appears that in the case of offence
punishable under Section 19 or Section 24 or Section 27(a) or
for offences involving commercial quantity, the charge-sheet
can be submitted within 180 days and if the charge-sheet is not
submitted within 180 days, the accused person is entitled for
default bail. The proviso to Section 37(a) speaks that public
prosecutor may take an extension of time for filing the charge-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74187 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
3/4
sheet and 180 days time can be extended for a period up to one
year. After the public prosecutor files that progress report of the
investigation and gives specific reasons for detention of the
accused beyond the said period of 180 days. In the present case,
the Special Public Prosecutor has not filed any application for
extension of period of the charge-sheet and the charge-sheet as
per the contention of the petitioners has been filed without FSL
report. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted
that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since
04.12.2024. Moreover, similarly situated other co-accused
person has already been granted bail by this Court vide order
dated 03.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 38414 of 2025.
5. In the case of Rabi Prakash vs. the State of
Odisha, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the prolonged
incarceration generally militate against the most precious
fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India and in such situation, the conditional
liberty must override the statutory embargo created under
Section 37 sub-clause 1(b) of the NDPS Act. The charge-sheet
filed without FSL report does not ipso facto creates any
embargo against the fundamental right of a citizen enshrined in
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74187 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
4/4
6. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Bela P.S. Case No. 259 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge (NDPS Act), Sitamarhi, Bihar.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-
U T
Checking your session…