Patna High Court
Mohammad RizwanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to both petitioners subject to a bond and conditions.
Summary
Petitioners Mohammad Rizwan and Bauna Kasim were arrested in connection with a seizure of large quantities of narcotic tablets and capsules, alleged under sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act and section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. They contended that they had no possession of the drugs or the seized motorcycle, that the witnesses to the seizure were not independent, and that the charge‑sheet was filed without a forensic laboratory (FSL) report. The State opposed bail, but the Court noted the absence of a forensic report, the petitioners' lack of criminal antecedent, their prolonged custody since 4‑Oct‑2025, and the conclusion of the investigation. Considering these factors, the Court ordered that both petitioners be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and cooperation. The bail may be cancelled if the petitioners acquire a criminal antecedent or fail to cooperate with the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted in an NDPS case where the charge‑sheet was filed without a forensic laboratory report.
- Whether the petitioners' claim of having no possession of the seized narcotics and being falsely implicated warrants bail.
- Whether the petitioners' lack of criminal antecedent and prolonged pre‑trial custody justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 111
- Drugs and Cosmetics Act
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21, 22
Subjects
- regular bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics seizure
- forensic laboratory report
- false implication
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90725 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2025 Thana- SIKTI District- Araria
======================================================
1. Mohammad Rizwan Son of Late Tafezul Resident of village- Kelabari, Ward
no. 04, Ps- Sikty, Dist- Araria
2. Bauna Kasim @ Kasim Son of Md. Iliyas Resident of village- Kelabari,
Ward no. 04, Ps- Sikty, Dist- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kishore Bharti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
6 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Sikty P.S. Case no. 181
of 2025 registered under sections 21 and 22 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and section 111
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, 500 packets i.e. a total
of 5000 tablets of Diey Lomme HCL I.P. 20 mg tablets and 980
packets i.e. a total of 9800 tablets of Tramadol Hydro Chloride
I.P. 50 mg capsules is said to have been recovered from the
possession of the petitioners and they were taken into custody.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90725 of 2025(6) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioners’
possession who have been falsely implicated in the case. They have
no concern with the seized tablets or capsules nor with the seized
motorcycle. No case under section 21 or 22 of the NDPS Act or the
Drugs and Cosmetics Act is made out against the petitioners. The
witnesses to the seizure list are not independent. There has been
violation of section 103 of the BNSS and the chargesheet was
submitted on 24.12.2025 without any FSL report being available on
record which has been submitted and included with the case diary
only on 20.1.2026. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioners
in the FIR, the material that has transpired in course of
investigation specially the petitioners not having any concern
with the seized motorcycle, chargesheet having been submitted
in the learned Court below without the FSL report, the
petitioners being in custody since 4.10.2025, investigation in the
case having concluded and specially the petitioners not having
an criminal antecedent, both the petitioners are directed to be
enlarged on bail in connection with Sikty P.S. Case no. 181 of 2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90725 of 2025(6) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to
satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,
NDPS Act, Araria on the following conditions:
(i) In case it subsequently transpires that either of the
petitioners have any criminal antecedent, the prosecution will be
at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail granted
to the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in
the learned trial Court and shall cooperate in the trial.
(iii) In case the petitioners are absent on any single
date for reasons not to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court,
or the learned trial Court is of the opinion that the trial is being
delayed due to non-cooperation of the petitioners, the learned
trial Court may cancel the bail bond of the petitioners and take
them into custody till conclusion of the trial.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.