Patna High Court
Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Sah @ Dilip Saw @ Dileep Kumar @ Dileep SahversusUnion of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna.
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
Dilip Kumar was arrested under Sections 8, 20, 25, 27A and 29 of the NDPS Act in 2017. An earlier bail order granted by the Patna High Court was set aside by the Supreme Court, which required his surrender before the trial court before a fresh bail application could be considered. After surrendering, his subsequent bail petition was rejected, and the trial has progressed very slowly, with no prosecution witness fully examined even after two years and four months of custody. The petitioner argued that continued detention violates his constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21, relying on the Supreme Court’s observations in Pradeep Kumar @ Banu v. State of Punjab and the precedent of Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar. The NCB counsel acknowledged the delay but could not dispute the facts. The Patna High Court, noting the lack of trial progress and the petitioner’s prolonged incarceration, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Cr.P.C. Section 437(3), BNSS Section 480(3), and additional safeguards. The order emphasizes the petitioner’s duty to cooperate with the trial and restrictions on leaving Bihar without court permission.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the Supreme Court’s earlier cancellation of his bail order.
- Whether the prolonged pre‑trial detention violates the petitioner’s right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Cr.P.C. 437(3) and BNSS 480(3) are sufficient to justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 480(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 437(3)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20, 25, 27A, 29, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- speedy trial
- Article 21
- pre‑trial detention
- Supreme Court precedent
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90855 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2017 Thana- N.C.B (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL)
District- Patna
======================================================
Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Sah @ Dilip Saw @ Dileep Kumar @ Dileep Sah S/o
Hari Sharan Chaudhary R/o Village- Maujipur (Mouzipur), P.S- Nadi, Fatuha
(Fatwah), Dist- Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna. Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Prasoon Shekhar, Advocate
Mr.Ankit Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mr.Awadhesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. CGC
Mr.Arvind Kumar, CGC
Mr.Avinash Kumar, Advocate
Mr.Lokesh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 24-04-2026 Heard Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned senior counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Awadhesh Kumar
Pandey, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Union of
India.
2. The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection with
NCB Patna Case No. NCB/PZU/V/01/2017 (Special (NDPS)
No. 10(A) of 2017) registered for the offences under Sections 8,
20, 25, 27A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985.
3. This is the second prayer of bail after cancellation of
bail of petitioner by Hon’ble Supreme Court through SLP
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90855 of 2025(4) dt.24-04-2026
2/5
(Criminal) No. 1368 of 2019 dated 29th November, 2021,
wherein order of one of the learned coordinate Bench granting
regular bail to the petitioner through Cr. Misc. No. 55092 of
2017 dated 03.01.2018 was set-aside for the reason that the
order passed by this Court was cryptic.
4. It is submitted by Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned senior
counsel appearing for the petitioner that while canceling the
aforesaid bail order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that
bail application of petitioner shall be considered only when the
respondent surrendered before the trial court.
5. It is submitted that after surrendering the petitioner,
the bail petition was preferred by him which was rejected by
this Court through Cr. Misc. No. 21431 of 2025 dated
08.09.2025, wherein it was directed to learned trial court to take
all appropriate steps to conclude the trial in accordance with law
at its earlier.
6. In the aforesaid background, the present secondary
bail petition, in actual third, was preferred solely on the ground
of slow progress of trial and custody period of the petitioner.
7. It is further submitted by Mr. Shahi that petitioner
remains in custody for about two years and four months, despite
not even first prosecution witness was examined completely.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90855 of 2025(4) dt.24-04-2026
3/5
The aforesaid submission was also confirmed by learned trial
court vide its report dated 26th March, 2026.
8. Mr. Shahi cited the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme
Court as available through Pradeep Kumar @ Banu Vs. State
of Punjab (passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1341 of 2026
(Arising out of SLP (Cri.) No. 18775/2025) reported in 2026
Live Law (SC) 302.
9. It is also submitted by Mr. Shahi that the petitioner
cannot be kept behind the bar for any indefinite period in want
of trial as same is amounting to violation of his fundamental
right qua speedy trial as available under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India and further reliance was made on
Hussainara Khatoon & Ors Vs. Home Secretary State of
Bihar reported in 1980 (1) SCC 98.
10. Learned counsel for the NCB is present and could
not disputed the custody period and non-progress of trial.
11. In view of the aforesaid submission, as there is
almost no progress in trial as not even a single witness was
examined completely, despite of the fact that petitioner remains
in custody for about two years and four months which is
amounting to depriving his fundamental right qua speedy trial,
therefore, taking note of Pradeep Kumar @ Banu’s case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90855 of 2025(4) dt.24-04-2026
4/5
(supra) and Hussainara Khatoon’s case (supra), above-named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail, furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Special Court (N.D.P.S.) No. 1, Patna/concerned court, in
connection with NCB Patna Case No. NCB/PZU/V/01/2017
(Special (NDPS) No. 10(A) of 2017), subject to the condition as
laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C/Section 480(3) of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”) and
further condition:
(i) That accused/Petitioner shall cooperate in the
trial and shall be physically present on each and
every date before the Trial Court till conclusion of
the trial and exemption from physical appearance
be allowed by the Trial Court, only on medical
ground of the petitioner duly supported by the
documents.
(ii) That petitioner shall not leave the territory of
Bihar, till conclusion of trial, without permission of
learned trial court.
(iii) Needless to observe, the petitioner shall not,
directly or indirectly, by making inducement, threat
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90855 of 2025(4) dt.24-04-2026
5/5
or promise, dissuade any person acquainted with
the facts of the case from disclosing such facts to
the court.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…