Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that there is no new ground for reconsideration and therefore denied bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case (PS No.940 of 2024) involving offences under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 22(c) of the NDPS Act and Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. This was his second bail application after the Patna High Court had earlier rejected his request on 30‑04‑2025, citing recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity and an embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The court noted that only one of five witnesses had been examined and that no new material or ground had been presented to merit a fresh consideration. Consequently, the bail petition was again denied, with the court directing the trial court to expedite the trial and complete it within six months, after which the petitioner may file another bail application. The decision re‑affirms the earlier denial and emphasizes speedy trial disposal.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under the NDPS Act and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita given the recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity and the embargo under Section 37.
- Whether any new ground exists to revisit the earlier denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21(c), 22(c), 37, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- contraband
- judicial custody
- trial expeditious
- Section 37 embargo
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79460 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-940 Year-2024 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/O Lal Bahahdur Ray R/O Vill.- Rajiv Nagar Road no. 23, P.S.
and P.O.- Rajiv Nagar, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Praveen Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Narendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in 940 of 2024 instituted
for the offences under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 21(c) of the
NDPS Act and Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order
dated 30.04.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 11839
of 2025, taking into account the recovery of contraband beyond
commercial quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of
the N.D.P.S. Act.
4. In compliance of the order dated 21.11.2025, a
report dated 06.01.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79460 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
2/2
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that out of five witnesses, one witness has been
examined and summons have been issued against the remaining
witnesses.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 07.10.2024
without any rhymes or reason.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
grant of bail.
7. There is no new ground to reconsider the bail
petition of the petitioner.
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously
preferably within a period of six months from today. If the trial
is not concluded within the period of six months, as stated
above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before
the learned Court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.