Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Mithilesh Kumar RoyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Mithilesh Kumar Roy, a manager of Puja Sewa Sadan, was implicated after a drug inspection on 29‑08‑2024 uncovered medicines and 396 antigen kits marked 'not for sale' and lacking a valid licence. A complaint was filed under several provisions of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, and the petitioner sought bail fearing arrest. He contended that he was not the proprietor, nor responsible for storing or manufacturing the alleged substandard medicines, which were purportedly used for pathology tests. The State opposed the bail application. The Court, after considering the facts, ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon surrender within eight weeks, conditioned on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and compliance with Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is liable under the Drugs & Cosmetics Act for possession of unlicensed medicines and antigen kits.
  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner pending trial.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Drugs & Cosmetics Act
  • unlicensed medicines
  • antigen kits
  • licensing
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82222 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2024 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP.
                                                    District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Mithilesh Kumar Roy S/o Late Ramchandra Roy Resident of Village -
                 Saidpur, P.S - Chakmehsi, District - Samastipur

                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Vinita, Drug Inspector, Samastipur - 2 (Bihar)

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :    Mr.Saurav Anand
                 For the Opposite Party/s :    Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   22-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint

                   case punishable for the offence under Sections 18(c), 18(A),

                   18(a)(vi), 65(18) and Section 27(b)(ii), 28, 27(d) of the Drugs &

                   Cosmetic Act.

                                3. On 29.08.2024 at 12.35 PM, an inspection was held

                   in petitioner’s centre namely Puja Sewa Sadan                and during

                   inspection, some medicines, including Antigen kits having

                   mentioned ‘not for sale’, were recovered and on being asked,

                   petitioner did not produce any valid licence for keeping those

                   medicines and as such, aforesaid complaint was lodged.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82222 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     petitioner is not proprietor of the aforesaid centre, rather is

                     posted as Manager and was in no way responsible for keeping

                     those substandard medicines nor he is manufacturer of those

                     medicines and as such, no case under the Drug & Cosmetics Act

                     is made out against petitioner. The alleged recovered 396 kits

                     were being used for pathology test.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail

                     petition.

                                  6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

                     let the above named petitioner, in the event of arrest/surrender

                     within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail

                     on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

                     sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

                     A.D.J. I cum Special Judge, Drugs and Cosmetics Act,

                     Samastipur in connection with Complaint Case No. 2 of 2024,

                     subject to condition as laid down under Section 482 of the

                     Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.



                                                   (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.