Patna High Court

Jitendra DasversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 1 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANIL KUMAR SINHA

Holding

The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Jitendra Das applied for anticipatory bail after his son was arrested in a raid that uncovered counterfeit currency and a heroin-like substance. The police alleged that Das operated the shop where the contraband was found, citing Sections 179/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8(c) and 21(a) of the NDPS Act, 1985. Das contended he was not present at the shop and was falsely implicated based on his son's statement. The prosecution opposed bail, arguing there was a direct allegation against Das. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail and dismissed the application.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and NDPS Act given the alleged involvement in counterfeit currency and narcotics offenses
Whether the allegation based solely on the co-accused's statement suffices to deny bail

Legislation cited

Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 179, 3(5)
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(a), 8(c)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
counterfeit currency
NDPS Act
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal procedure
bail denial
co-accused statement

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90646 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-391 Year-2025 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Jitendra Das S/o- Prayag Das Village- Chainpur PS-Barachatti Dist- Gaya
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. O. P. Maharaj
                                                  Mr.Sudhir Kumar Sinha
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   01-04-2026         1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

                            Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                       2.   This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out

                            of Barachhati Police Station Case No. 391 of 2025, dated

                            08.11.2025,       disclosing     offences       punishable       under

                            Sections 179/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

                            and Section 8(c)/21(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and

                            Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

                       3.   The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report,

                            is that the police, on receiving secret information that

                            counterfeit currency is concealed in the Anushka Online

                            Centre, raided the said shop and found the son of the

                            petitioner in the said shop. On search of the shop in

                            question, the police recovered counterfeit currency to the

                            tune of Rs. 20,000/- in Rs. 500/-, Rs. 200/- and Rs. 100/-

                            denomination. The police also recovered 05 grams of
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90646 of 2025(3) dt.01-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                               heroine like substance from the said shop. The son of the

                               petitioner, namely, Anshu Kumar was taken into custody,

                               who disclosed that his father, i.e. the petitioner, operate

                               the shop in question.

                          4.   Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                               petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

                               this case at the behest of some interested person. He

                               further submits that the name of the petitioner transpired

                               in this case on the basis of statement of co-accused Anshu

                               Kumar. The petitioner was not present in the shop at the

                               time of search and seizure.

                          5.   On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

                               vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that

                               there is direct allegation against the petitioner.

                          6.   Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf

                               of the parties and taking into consideration the

                               seriousness of the offence, I am not inclined to grant the

                               petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

                          7.   This application is, accordingly, dismissed.


                                                                           (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)
Prabhakar Anand/-

U √     T   √

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.