Patna High Court
Raj Kishor SadaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because the petitioner failed to produce documentary evidence of the vehicle's transfer and the investigation remained ongoing.
Summary
Petitioner Raj Kishor Sada applied for anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii), (c) of the NDPS Act, alleging that he is a clean person and that the seized 43 kg of ganja was found in an auto he owned but had allegedly sold to Majharul before the incident. The State opposed the bail, contending that no documentary evidence was produced to prove the transfer of ownership and that the investigation was still pending. The petitioner relied on a pleading in paragraph 7 of his application to assert the sale of the vehicle. The court examined the lack of supporting documents and the seriousness of the alleged offence. Concluding that the petitioner had not satisfied the requirement of showing a legitimate transfer of ownership, the court refused to grant anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the NDPS Act in the absence of documentary proof of ownership transfer of the seized vehicle.
- Whether the petitioner's clean antecedent and claim of prior sale of the auto are sufficient grounds for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii), 20(c), 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- NDPS Act
- drug trafficking
- ownership of vehicle
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80885 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- GHURNA District- Araria
======================================================
Raj Kishor Sada, Son of Late Shukru Sada Resident of Village - Balbhdrapur,
Police Station - Birpur, District - Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arun
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ahmad Ali
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 8, 20(b)(ii),(c) of the NDPS Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that on 24.01.2025 at 10.30 P.M. during
patrolling, an auto driver seeing patrolling team left the auto and
fled and from the auto, 43 kg. of ganja was recovered.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and he came to be
implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the auto. It is
further submitted that specific pleading has been made at Para-7
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80885 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/2
that petitioner, prior to the occurrence, had sold the Auto to
Majharul.
5. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the anticipatory
bail application and submits that allegation is of recovery of
43kg of ganja from an auto. It is submitted that though a
pleading has been made at Para-7 of the anticipatory bail
application that petitioner sold the auto prior to the occurrence
to Majharul, but then, it is submitted that no documentary
evidence has been annexed with the anticipatory bail application
showing that the ownership of the seized vehicle was transferred
in favour of Majharul. It is also submitted that investigation of
the case is continuing.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail
stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…