Patna High Court

Md. Sartaz @ SartazversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 5 January 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Sartaz, sought bail in a case where 4.365 kg of ganja was seized from his residence and he was charged under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. The prosecution alleged possession of a substantial quantity of narcotics, while the petitioner claimed innocence, alleging that the seizure was made below the bed, that the police did not comply with Section 105 of the BNSS, and that the seizure witnesses were police personnel. He also highlighted his lack of criminal antecedents and his continued judicial custody since 08.08.2025. The State opposed bail. After hearing both sides, the Court, noting the procedural irregularities and the petitioner’s clean record, decided to enlarge bail, directing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The bail order was issued by Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey of the Patna High Court.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in an NDPS case involving 4.365 kg of ganja, considering the quantity is more than a small amount but less than commercial quantity.
Whether procedural lapses, such as non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS and police witnesses to the seizure, justify granting bail.

Legislation cited

BNSS Act — s. 105
NDPS Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(B), 8(c)

Subjects

bail
NDPS Act
drug possession
procedural lapse
seizure
quantity of narcotics
surety

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87336 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-219 Year-2025 Thana- RAUTA District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Sartaz @ Sartaz son of Late Md. Rakib Resident of village - Abhaypur,
                 Bolwan Hat, Ward No.4, P.S. - Routa, District - Purnea

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mrs. Madhuri Lata, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   05-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Routa P.S. Case No. 219 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution in short is that from the

                   house of this petitioner, altogether 4.365 kg of Ganja was

                   recovered.

                                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 has submitted that from perusal of the

                   seizure list, it will transpire that the recovery has been made

                   below the bed from the room of the petitioner. It has also been
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87336 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     submitted that the police have not complied with Section 105 of

                     the BNSS while making the seizure, and the witnesses of the

                     seizure are also police personnel. He also submits that the

                     quantum of contraband which has been recovered from the

                     possession of this petitioner is though more than a small quantity

                     but is much less than commercial quantity. He further submits that

                     a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner

                     has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial

                     custody since 08.08.2025.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State.

                                  6. 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

                     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, NDPS Act, Purnea in connection with Routa P.S. Case No.

                     219 of 2025.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…