Patna High Court
Bharat KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted due to the seriousness of the offences, the intermediate quantity of narcotics, the presence of a firearm, and the petitioner’s criminal history.
Summary
Petitioner Bharat Kumar was arrested on 8 June 2025 for alleged possession of 1.85 kg of ganja, a loaded country-made pistol and a motorcycle, and was charged under Section 317(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, and Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. He applied for regular bail, contending that the quantity was only slightly above the small‑quantity threshold, that the trial had already commenced, and that the police had failed to comply with Section 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 103 of the BNS Act. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner’s criminal antecedent of eight cases and the presence of a firearm, and alleging an attempt to flee. The High Court, noting the intermediate quantity of narcotics, the firearm, the petitioner’s prior record and the alleged flight risk, rejected the bail application, directing the trial court to expedite the trial and allowing a fresh bail application after six months or after witness examination. The order was pronounced by Justice Shailendra Singh.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted in a case involving alleged possession of an intermediate quantity of narcotic substance and a firearm, considering the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
- Whether non‑compliance with procedural requirements under Section 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 103 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act bars the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103, 317(5)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(B), 50, 8
Subjects
- regular bail
- NDPS Act
- Arms Act
- intermediate quantity
- criminal antecedent
- procedural compliance
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90106 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2025 Thana- MUSAHARI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Bharat Kumar S/o Baidyanath Sahni @ Bainath Sahani Resident of village -
Bochahan Dharna @ Bhagawanpur Bochaha, P.S - Bochaha, District -
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nachiketa Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard the parties.
Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Mushahari P.S. Case No. 131 of 2025 registered for the offences
under Section 317(5) of the BNS, Sections 25(1-B)(a) 26 and 35
of the Arms Act and Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act.
3. As per allegation, from the possession of this
petitioner a wrapped packet was recovered and upon opening it,
total 1.85 kg of Ganja like substance was found, from
possession of co-accused alok kumar, a loaded country made
pistol was recovered and a motorcycle was also recovered, no
document relating to the recovered articles were produced by
the petitioner or the co-accused persons which are alleged to
have been looted by them.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90106 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
4. The main submissions advanced by learned counsel
for the petitioner are that the petitioner has been languishing in
jail since 08.06.2025 though against him, there are criminal
antecedent of eight cases, he has been granted bail in five of
those cases. In the instant matter relates to the alleged recovery
of 1.850 kg ganja like substance which is only slightly above the
small quantity. It is further submitted that the trial of the
petitioner has started after the framing of charges upon him and
the police did not comply with the provisions of section 50 of
the NDPS act as well as section 103 of the BNS.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed
the bail prayer.
6. Considering the petitioner’s criminal history of
eight cases and the recovery of alleged Narcotic contraband
which falls in the purview of intermediate quantity and the
same is alleged to have been recovered from his possession and
also considering the prosecution allegation that this petitioner
and two co-accused attempted to flee on seeing the police party
and from possession of one co-accused, loaded country made
pistol was recovered, in my opinion, it is not a fit case for grant
of bail. Accordingly, his bail prayer stands rejected.
7. The petitioner’s trial has started, so, the trial court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90106 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
shall expedite the trial of the petitioner. The petitioner may
renew his prayer for bail after six months or after examination
of the witnesses of the seizure.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
siddharthkr/-
U T
Checking your session…