Patna High Court
Rohan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond and specific conditions.
Summary
Rohan Kumar was arrested in Muzaffarpur after police recovered a gold chain, a mangalsutra and about six grams of a substance resembling heroin from his possession. He was charged under Section 317(4) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 8(c) and 21(B) of the NDPS Act. The petitioner argued that he was innocent, that the recovery did not meet the commercial quantity threshold, that the mandatory seizure list under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not prepared, and that the charge sheet had already been filed, eliminating any risk of evidence tampering. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the narcotics possession. The Court, noting the filing of the charge sheet, the short period of custody and the lack of likelihood of tampering, granted bail on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding surety, trial attendance, and non‑tampering. The bail order was made subject to cancellation if the petitioner violates any of the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in an NDPS case involving possession of six grams of a narcotic substance and gold items.
- Whether the alleged non‑compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act vitiates the prosecution's case.
- Whether the quantity seized, being less than commercial quantity, warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 317(4)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(B), 50, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics possession
- Section 50 compliance
- commercial quantity
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89361 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-698 Year-2025 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Rohan Kumar S/O Sanjay Ray R/O Vill.- Chakmohabbat, P.S.- Ahiyapur,
Dist.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 As prayed for, learned counsel for the petitioner is
permitted to make necessary correction in para-3 of the bail
petition during course of the day.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 698 of 2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 317(4) BNS and Section 8(c), 21(B)
of the NDPS Act.
4. As per prosecution case, petitioner was
apprehended by the police and on search, gold like chain
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89361 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
weighing 13.02 gram, gold like mangalsutra weighing 26.46
gram and total 6 gram smack like substance were recovered
from possession of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence
as alleged in the FIR and he has falsely been implicated in this
case. Petitioner is in custody since 24.05.2025. Charge sheet has
been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of
tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits
that there is no compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act
which vitiates the entire prosecution story. He further submits
that alleged recovery of 6 gram smack like substance from
possession of the petitioner is much less than commercial
quantity. Seizure list has not been made as per mandatory
provision of law which questions the authenticity of the
prosecution story. Apart from that, petitioner bears two criminal
antecedent which are not similar to the present case, as
mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition.
6. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is
alleged recovery of 6 gram smack like substance, gold like
chain and mangalsutra from possession of the petitioner and he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89361 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
cannot escape from the allegation made in the FIR.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, period of custody, charge sheet has been submitted in the
case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the
prosecution evidence, argument advanced on behalf of both
sides and also taking into consideration the material available on
record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (rupees twenty five
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Court-1 (NDPS),
Muzaffarpur in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 698 of
2025, subject to following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or
mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn
the affidavit in bail application.
(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will
remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive
dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for
cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.
(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or
the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89361 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar
nature of offences in future, the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel his bail bond.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
shahzad/-
U T
Checking your session…