Patna High Court
Vivek Sahni @ Vivake SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, holding that the right to liberty outweighs the statutory embargo in the circumstances of the case.
Summary
Vivek Sahni applied for bail in a case registered under Section 414 of the IPC and Sections 8C, 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act, where 2 kg of charas, mobile phones and cash were seized from a four‑wheeler in which he was allegedly present. The petitioner claimed he was neither the owner nor the driver of the vehicle and that the seized items were not in his possession, citing that co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, alleging three prior criminal cases against the petitioner. The court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha, emphasizing that prolonged incarceration infringes Article 21 and that conditional liberty can outweigh the statutory restriction under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act. After considering the arguments, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under the NDPS Act despite the statutory embargo of Section 37(1)(b).
- Whether the petitioner’s prolonged pre‑trial detention violates the right to liberty under Article 21.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement in the seized contraband justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 414
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(C), 29, 37(1)(b), 8C
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Article 21
- prolonged detention
- conditional liberty
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84968 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2023 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Vivek Sahni @ Vivake Sahni S/o Bijali Sahni R/o village - Chand Parsa, P.S -
Keshariya, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhannjay Kumar II, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Rita Verma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mrs. Rita Verma, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Sursand P.S. Case No. 217 of 2023 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 414 of the Indian Penal
Code, Sections 8C, 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that from a
four-wheeler on search, 2 kg of charas, mobile phones, and cash
were recovered. The petitioner and the other co-accused persons
were found sitting inside the said vehicle.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84968 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
been recovered from the possession of this petitioner. The
petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the alleged
vehicle. He also submits that similarly situated other co-accused
persons, namely, Arvind Kumar Singh, Ajay Kumar Sahni, and
Raushan Kumar, have already been granted bail by the learned
coordinate bench of this court in Cr. Misc. Nos. 78514 of 2025,
15069 of 2025, and 33528 of 2025 respectively. He further
submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody
since 01.05.2023.
5. In the case of Rabi Prakash vs. the State of
Odisha, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the prolonged
incarceration generally militate against the most precious
fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the
constitution of India and in such situation, the conditional
liberty must override the statutory embargo created under
Section 37 sub-clause 1(b) of the NDPS Act.
6. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal
antecedent of three cases.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84968 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special
Judge, Sitamarhi in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No. 217
of 2023.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…