Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified bond and conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, was arrested for alleged possession of 11 grams of 'smack' under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act. He claimed false implication, argued that the quantity was below commercial quantity and thus Section 37 of the NDPS Act should not apply, and highlighted his clean antecedent and student status. The State opposed bail. The High Court, after considering the facts, directed that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of personal appearance, a close relative as a bailor, and verification of antecedents. The order emphasized that any observations would not affect the trial and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under the NDPS Act for possession of a quantity below commercial quantity
- Whether Section 37 of the NDPS Act is attracted in the present case
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and student status warrant bail
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21(b), 37, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics possession
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84749 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2025 Thana- Baijnathpur District- Saharsa
======================================================
Rahul Kumar Son of Pradeep Yadav Resident of Village- Gamhariya, Ward
No. 11, P.S.- Baijnathpur, Dist.- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.
Mr.Binod Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Baijnathpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 2025 dated 06.08.2025
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and
21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that he received secret information that Rahul Kumar
(petitioner) was carrying smack. It is further alleged that the
petitioner was apprehended and on search, total 11 gm. of smack
was recovered from his conscious possession.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84749 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
such recovery has been made from his conscious possession. It
has further been submitted that the petitioner is a student and
has falsely been implicated by the police. It has next been
submitted that the recovered narcotic substance is below the
commercial quantity and hence, rigors of section 37 of the
N.D.P.S. Act is not attracted against the petitioner. It is lastly
submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in
custody since 07.08.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his
furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Principal Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Saharsa in
connection with Baijnathpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 2025 subject to
the following terms and conditions :-
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial
and shall cooperate in the investigation.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84749 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner
will liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent
of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the
petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court
shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the
above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in
the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Gautam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.