Patna High Court
Rajesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the petitioners, subject to bond and conditions, as the prosecution failed to establish possession of contraband by them and statutory bail requirements were not met.
Summary
The petitioners, Nitish Kumar and Rajesh Kumar, were arrested in connection with a drug seizure case (PS Case No. 423 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 21(b) and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The prosecution alleged that a Bolero was intercepted on 24‑08‑2025 and 400 grams of narcotics, cash and other items were recovered, but the petitioners contended that no contraband was found in their personal possession and they were falsely implicated. Their counsel argued that Section 37 of the NDPS Act was inapplicable, and that the State had not complied with the bail provisions of Sections 42 and 50. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. Considering the lack of direct recovery from the petitioners, their clean record and the period of custody, the Court granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and conditions regarding family surety and regular appearance in court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to accused under Sections 8(c), 21(b) and 22 of the NDPS Act when no narcotics were recovered from their possession.
- Whether the requirements of Sections 37, 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have been satisfied for bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(b), 22, 37, 42, 50, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- drug trafficking
- Sections 8, 21, 22
- Section 37
- Section 42
- Section 50
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2528 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-423 Year-2025 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Nitish Kumar S/O Sikandra Yadav Resident of Vill.- Tamaut, P.S.- Murliganj,
District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 79919 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-423 Year-2025 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Rajesh Kumar S/O Sita Ram Sharma Resident Of Village- Manjama Ward
No. 05, Gram Panchayat Jirwa Madhaili, P.s.- Shankarpur, District-
Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 2528 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 79919 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with
Murliganj P.S. Case No. 423 of 2025 instituted for the offences
under Sections 8(c), 21(b), 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2528 of 2026(5) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 24.08.2025,
police intercepted a Bolero near Mirganj Chowk and recovered
400 grams smack, Rs. 9,400/- cash, Bolero vehicle and mobile
phones from the accused persons including the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case.
Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Petitioners are in
custody since 25.08.2025 and have no criminal antecedent.
There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against
the petitioners. No incriminating material has been recovered
from the conscious possession of the petitioners. Learned
counsel further submitted that as per search and seizure memo,
the recovery of the alleged contraband has been attributed to co-
accused Anshu Kumar and so far as the petitioners are
concerned, there is no any recovery of contraband from their
possession and, hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not
applicable in the present case. Learned counsel further
submitted that the prayer for grant of bail to the co-accused
Anshu Kumar has already been rejected by this Court vide order
dated 21.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1911 of 2026. There is
no compliance of Section 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2528 of 2026(5) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, there being no recovery of the contraband from the
possession of the petitioners as also the period of custody
undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail
to the petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case
No. 423 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioners.
(II) The petitioners shall appear on each and every
date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on
two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel
the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.