Patna High Court

Md. Tahimad Alam @ Md. Tahmid AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The Court rejected the petitioner's application for regular bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Tahimad Alam, was arrested on 3 December 2021 in connection with a case under the NDPS Act for possession of 78 kg of ganja, a quantity exceeding commercial limits. He sought regular bail, arguing that he has been in custody since his arrest, has a clean antecedent, and that the trial has been delayed despite a prior order to expedite it. The State opposed bail, noting that the trial is at the stage of recording the accused's statement under Section 313 of the CrPC and that only defence evidence remains to be examined. The Court considered the seriousness of the offence, the large quantity of narcotics seized, and the stage of the proceedings, and consequently rejected the bail application. The trial court was directed to expedite the trial.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail should be granted to an accused in an NDPS case involving a large quantity of narcotics.
Whether the stage of trial (statement of accused under Sec. 313 CrPC) precludes bail.

Legislation cited

Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) — s. 313
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 22

Subjects

NDPS Act
bail
drug seizure
Criminal Procedure Code
trial expediting

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89064 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-159 Year-2021 Thana- INDUSTRIAL District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Tahimad Alam @ Md. Tahmid Alam son of Late Tuhid Alam @ Late
                 Tohid Alam @ Late Tauhid Alam Resident of village- Vaipari Tola, Fatehpur,
                 Ps- Industrial Area, District -Bhagalpur
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastri, A.P.P
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   25-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   N.D.P.S. Case No. 81 of 2021 arising out of Industrial Area P.S.

                   Case No. 159 of 2021 lodged on 02.12.2021, for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c)/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act,

                   pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-XIII,

                   Bhagalpur.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   regular bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected

                   vide order dated 14.11.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 26408 of

                   2022 with specific direction to the trial court to expedite the

                   trial. Counsel submits that the petitioner is in custody since

                   03.12.2021, having clean antecedent. Counsel submits that the

                   petitioner has unnecessarily been kept into custody and he was a
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89064 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       scapegoat in this case. Counsel further submits that on earlier

                       occasion, report with regard to the present stage of the trial was

                       called for.

                                     4. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                       bail of the petitioner and submits that on earlier occasion, report

                       with regard to the present stage of the trial was called for and

                       from the said report, it transpires that the case is pending at the

                       stage of statement of accused persons under section 313 Cr.P.C.,

                       and it transpires that only examination of defence evidence has

                       to be taken place, if available.

                                     5. In the present facts and circumstances of the case

                       considering that 78 Kg. of Ganja has been recovered in this case

                       which is much more than the commercial quantity, this Court is

                       not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the

                       prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

                                     6. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial at

                       the earliest.



                                                                      (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.