Patna High Court
Md. Asgar AliversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, holding that the petitioner’s alleged contacts do not amount to participation in the offence and that bail may be granted subject to conditions.
Summary
Md. Asgar Ali applied for anticipatory bail in a case involving the alleged seizure of 1,198 litres of codeine syrup, alleged under IPC sections 272-276 and NDPS Act section 21(b). He argued that he was not named in the FIR, that the seized consignment was intended for a rival medical shop, and that his only contacts with the driver and the supplier were routine telephone calls related to his own business orders. The State submitted a counter‑affidavit indicating those calls and alleged involvement. The court examined whether mere telephone contact amounted to participation in the offence and considered the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. Finding insufficient evidence of direct involvement and noting the petitioner’s cooperation, the court granted anticipatory bail with a cash bond of Rs. 50,000, two sureties, and the condition that one surety be his father, while reserving the right to cancel bail if he fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in offences punishable under IPC sections 272-276 and NDPS Act section 21(b) when the petitioner is not named in the FIR.
- Whether mere telephone contact with the driver and supplier constitutes participation in the alleged drug seizure.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) of the CrPC are sufficient to safeguard the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 272, 273, 274, 275, 276
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21(b)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- codeine syrup seizure
- NDPS Act
- IPC sections 272-276
- telephone contact
- business rivalry
- bail conditions
- CrPC Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81203 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-247 Year-2021 Thana- BAISI District- Purnia
======================================================
Md. Asgar Ali Son of Akbar Ali Resident of Village- Walba, Ward No. 09,
P.S.- Mahalgaon, District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agrawal- Sr. Advocate
Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh- Advocate
Mr. Kumar Rajdeep- Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 17-03-2026 1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 272, 273, 274, 275 and 276 of the Indian Penal Code
and Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act.
3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has antecedent of one case under the
NDPS Act and the allegation is of recovery of 1198 litres of
codeine syrup from a pick-up vehicle and Sanjay along with
Sonu were arrested and Sanjay disclosed that he was
transporting the syrup from Kishanganj to Gulabbagh while
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81203 of 2025(4) dt.17-03-2026
2/6
Sonu disclosed that he is an employee of Soni Medical and the
owner had directed him to deliver the consignment at Rahat
Medical Hall Gulabbagh.
4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner
submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR,
it would manifest that Sanjay along with Sonu were
apprehended with 1198 litres of codeine syrup. It is further
submitted that Sanjay disclosed that he was transporting the
syrup while Sonu disclosed that he is an employee of Soni
Medical and his owner had asked him to deliver the
consignment at Rahat Medical Shop. It is next submitted that
owner of Rahat Medical Shop is one Md. Moin. It is next
submitted that petitioner is not named in the FIR and even the
apprehended accused did not even remotely suggest that the
consignment was to be delivered at the medical shop of the
petitioner namely, Ali Distributors, thus petitioner was not
named in the FIR. It is further submitted that petitioner and Md.
Moin are competitors. It is next submitted that petitioner also
gets his medicine delivered from Soni Medical and in support of
the same various receipts have been annexed with reply to the
counter-affidavit filed by the petitioner.
5. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81203 of 2025(4) dt.17-03-2026
3/6
the petitioner next submits that wife of Md. Moin, namely,
Jahan Ara two years of after institution of the instant FIR filed
an application before the police alleging therein that on account
of business rivalry, her husband came to be implicated when the
consignment apprehended was sent by Soni Medical to Ali
Distributors. It is further submitted that based on the application
of the wife of Md. Moin, the police started chasing the
petitioner necessitating filing of the instant anticipatory bail
application.
6. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad was
directed to file a counter-affidavit duly sworn by the
Superintendent of Police, Purnea. The learned A.P.P. submits
that a counter-affidavit duly sworn by the Superintendent of
Police, Purnea has been filed and in the counter-affidavit at
Para-4, the details with regard to the petitioner about his
involvement in the occurrence has been recorded. It is submitted
that CDR of the petitioner was investigated and it was found
that petitioner was in contact with the driver of the vehicle on
15.08.2021 for around 72 seconds, thereafter on 23.08.2021 for
157 seconds and on 25.08.2021 for 39 seconds and was also in
contact with owner of Soni Medical on 23.08.2021 for 15
seconds and thereafter again on 30.08.2021 for 901 seconds.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81203 of 2025(4) dt.17-03-2026
4/6
7. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits that a reply to the counter-affidavit has
been filed denying the allegations. It is submitted that merely
because petitioner had contacted the driver and Soni Medical
that in itself does not involve the petitioner in the occurrence. It
is submitted that as submitted earlier and recorded herein above,
that petitioner also used to order medicine from Soni Medical
and it was in that connection that he was talking to the owner of
the Soni Medical and the driver of the vehicle. It is also
submitted that the date of occurrence as alleged in the instant
FIR is 29.08.2021 whereas petitioner had talked to the driver of
the vehicle on 15.08.2021, 23.08.2021 and 25.08.2021, but the
said talk was in connection with his consignment. It is reiterated
and submitted that the apprehended accused did not even
remotely suggest that the consignment was meant for Ali
Distributors, but since Ali Distributors and Rahat Medical are
competitors, as such, it appears that wife of Md. Moin by way
of after thought two years after the institution of the instant FIR
tried to implicate the petitioner. It is also submitted that if
privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner will not
abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his
innocence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81203 of 2025(4) dt.17-03-2026
5/6
8. The learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad
opposes the anticipatory bail application.
9. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail
on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty 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 Baisi P. S. Case
No.247 of 2021, subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with a further condition that one
of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father namely, Akbar
Ali.
10. The application stands allowed.
11. However, it is made clear that in the event, if
any application is filed by the Investigating Officer before the
learned trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner, despite
giving assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in the
investigation or is not presenting himself as and when required,
the learned trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds
of the petitioner after recording reasons.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81203 of 2025(4) dt.17-03-2026
6/6
12. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned
Police Station through the learned trial Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…