Patna High Court
Santosh Kumar @ LangaraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioner no.2 (Guriya Devi) subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Summary
The petitioners, Santosh Kumar and his sister Guriya Devi, filed anticipatory bail applications in a case registered under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)B of the NDPS Act. Santosh withdrew his application, which the court allowed, resulting in its dismissal. Guriya, a woman with a clean record, claimed she was falsely implicated by an informant who was also her brother, and submitted evidence of her marriage and residence separate from her father's house. The State opposed her bail, but the court, considering her antecedents and the circumstances of the allegation, granted her anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, to be confirmed by the trial court within six weeks. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Guriya Devi under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)B of the NDPS Act.
- Whether the alleged false implication and her clean antecedent justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20(b)(ii)B, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 8
- Section 20(b)(ii)B
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438(2)
- false implication
- women
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78839 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-621 Year-2025 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Santosh Kumar @ Langara S/o Late Bindeshwari Prasad R/o Village-
Dhangai, PS- Bikramganj, Dist- Rohtas
2. Guriya Devi D/o Late Bindeshwari Prasad R/o Village- Dhangai, PS-
Bikramganj, Dist- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing
vehemently for some times realizing his difficulty, seeks
permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with
respect to petitioner no. 1, namely, Santosh Kumar @ Langara.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is
dismissed as withdrawn with respect to petitioner no. 1.
5. The petitioner no. 2 apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8 and 20(b)
(ii)B of the NDPS Act.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner no. 2 submits that
petitioner no. 2 is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78839 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
and the informant alleges that 255 grams Ganja was recovered
from the kiosk of Manoj who was arrested and he disclosed that he
had purchased Ganja from Santosh and the petitioner no. 2
thereafter the house of the accused persons was raided and 7.600
Kgs. of Ganja was recovered from the house.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner no. 2 submits that
petitioner no. 2 has been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant being the own sister of Santosh. It is further
submitted that a specific pleading has been made at para 12 of the
anticipatory bail application that petitioner no. 2 is married to
Vikash and the marriage was performed in the year 2012 and she
stays at her matrimonial home at Salempur Pokhar, P.O. Jonhi, P.S.
Bikramganj, District Rohtas. It is further submitted that marriage
certificate of the petitioner no. 2 with Vikash is also annexed as
Annexure-2 to the anticipatory bail application. It is next
submitted that in the array of party, the petitioner no. 2 has been
described as daughter of Late Bindeshwari Prasad only for the
reason that in the FIR she was implicated by her father’s name. It
is also submitted that since petitioner was not implicated in the
case by the name of her husband, as such, at para 12 of the
anticipatory bail application specific pleading has been made. It is
submitted that even presuming what is alleged is true without
admitting then the recovered Ganja is less than commercial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78839 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
quantity but more than small quantity but then it is reiterated and
submitted that petitioner being sister of Santosh came to be
implicated when she does not stay at her father’s house.
8. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner no. 2.
9. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner no. 2 and taking into consideration the
fact that petitioner no. 2 is a woman with clean antecedent, let the
petitioner no. 2 above-named, in the event of her arrest or
surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six
weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
trial court where the case is pending/Successor Court in
connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 621 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…