Patna High Court

Gulsan Kumar @ Gulsan Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Gulsan Kumar, a resident of Jamui, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a NDPS case (PS Case No. 252 of 2024) involving alleged possession of 2.5 kg of ganja. He is not named in the FIR but was implicated through a confessional statement made by Dhanraj, who claimed Kumar was his brother‑in‑law and was present at the scene. The petitioner argued he has a clean antecedent and that the confessional statement lacks evidentiary value. The State opposed bail, contending that the statement links Kumar to the offence, the quantity involved is substantial, and granting bail could enable him to abscond while investigation continues. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petitioner's prayer.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person not named in the FIR but implicated through a confessional statement of another accused under the NDPS Act.
Whether the possibility of the petitioner absconding justifies denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 22, 27, 29

Subjects

anticipatory bail
NDPS Act
confessional statement
bail denial
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78743 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2024 Thana- CHAKAI District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Gulsan Kumar @ Gulsan Kumar Sah Son of Kailash Sah R/o Village-
                 Kiyajori, P.S.- Chakai, District- Jamui

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ebrahim Kabir, Adv
                                                  Ms.Shruti Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ajit Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-02-2026               1.     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.     The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Chakai PS Case No. 252 of 2024 registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 22, 27 and 29 of

                   NDPS Act.

                             3.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that 2.5 kg of ganja was recovered from possession of

                   Dhanraj.

                             4.     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is not named in the FIR and is a person with clean

                   antecedent and came to be implicated based on confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78743 of 2025(2) dt.16-02-2026
                                            2/3




          statement of Dhanraj in police custody which does not have any

          evidentiary value and even alleged recovery of psychotropic

          substance is from Dhanraj.

                   5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that no doubt

          petitioner is not named in the FIR, but then his name transpired

          in the confessional statement of Dhanraj in police custody, it is

          also submitted that even alleged recovery is more than small

          quantity and from perusal of the order impugned, it would

          manifest that Dhanraj disclosed before the police that petitioner

          is his brother-in-law (sala) and the motorcycle belongs to him

          and it was at his instance that he was bringing the psychotropic

          substance for handing it over to Diwakar and even petitioner

          was present at the place of occurrence at village Narodih, but

          then Dhanraj asked him to leave, when he saw the police vehicle

          coming and tried to escape but was arrested.            It is next

          submitted that investigation of the case is continuing and if

          privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the

          petitioner may abscond

                   6.     Considering the submission made by learned APP,

          the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory

          bail to the petitioner.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78743 of 2025(2) dt.16-02-2026
                                                          3/3




                                 7.     Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

                        petitioner is rejected.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…