Patna High Court
Md. ImranversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
Md. Imran, the owner of a motorcycle, was made an accused in a case where 166.101 kg of ganja and the motorcycle were seized. He was not named in the FIR nor arrested at the scene, and he has no prior criminal record. He applied for bail, arguing that his only connection to the contraband is ownership of the vehicle. The State opposed bail, emphasizing that the seized quantity is commercial and the FSL report confirms the substance as ganja. The court, after considering the facts, declined to grant bail, rejecting the petitioner's application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under Sections 20 and 22 of the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic quantity is commercial and the accused's link is merely ownership of the vehicle.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- seizure
- vehicle ownership
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83230 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- Madhusudanpur District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Md. Imran Son of Md. Altamash Choudhary Resident of Village- Dariyapur,
P.S.- Sajour, District- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Allama Abdul Quadir Jamal Faridi, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, learned senior counsel
for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 20/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. Total 166.101 kg of Ganja along with one
motorcycle were recovered from the place of occurrence. The
petitioner is the owner of the seized motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner has not been named in the First Information
Report and was also not arrested on the spot. He was rather
made an accused in this case only on account of the fact that he
was the owner of the seized motorcycle from which the
contraband was recovered. The petitioner is in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83230 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/2
04.05.2025 with no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the
application for bail on the ground that the contraband is of
commercial quantity and the FSL Report also indicates that the
same is Ganja.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is
rejected in connection Madhusudanpur P.S. Case No. 63 of
2025.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…