Patna High Court
LAKHINDRA RAI @ LAKHANversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Lakhindra Rai, was arrested on 19‑11‑2024 in connection with the recovery of 52 kg of ganja from a vehicle and charged under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act. He applied for bail, claiming a clean antecedent, that he was merely driving the vehicle and was unaware of the contraband, and that he had been falsely implicated by an informant. The State opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner had identified co‑accused after arrest, indicating his involvement, and emphasizing the commercial quantity of narcotics involved. The Court considered the seriousness of the offence and the prosecution’s submission. It concluded that bail could not be granted at this stage. Consequently, the petition for bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite alleged involvement in a commercial quantity narcotics offence under the NDPS Act and BNS.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of knowledge of the contraband negates the presumption of involvement.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 317(5)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- narcotics
- commercial quantity
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76749 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-390 Year-2024 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
LAKHINDRA RAI @ LAKHAN Son of Sonelal Rai Resident of village -
Sangrampur, Ward No.- 3, P.S.- Sonebarsa, District - Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Majorganj P.S. Case No.390/2024, registered for the offences
punishable under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
and Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is in custody since 19-11-2024 and is a person with
clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 52 KG of ganja
from a car and the petitioner was apprehend from the car and
disclosed the name of Tamish Kumar stating that Tamish Kumar
and others worked as route liner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76749 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/2
informant. It is next submitted that petitioner is not the owner
of the seized vehicle and was merely driving the car as such he
was not even aware that what was kept in the car.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from
perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest
that petitioner after his arrest disclosed the name of certain other
accused persons, who were involved in the occurrence, as such
it cannot be said at this stage that petitioner was not involved in
the occurrence. It is next submitted that allegation is of recovery
of commercial quantity of narcotics.
6. Considering the submission made by learned APP,
the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.