Patna High Court
Pranjal Kumar PatelversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as continued detention would be punitive and violative of Article 21.
Summary
Petitioner Pranjal Kumar Patel was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 21(c), 23(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of contraband beyond commercial quantity. He has been in judicial custody since 9 April 2025 and his earlier bail application was rejected. The petitioner argued that his continued pre‑trial detention violates his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court noted that no prosecution witness had yet been examined and the trial was expected to conclude within six months, rendering the detention punitive rather than custodial. Accordingly, the Court granted bail on a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions of regular appearance.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the alleged possession of contraband beyond commercial quantity under the NDPS Act
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(c), 23(c), 29
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- fundamental rights
- contraband
- surety
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9549 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2025 Thana- Haraiya District- East Champaran
======================================================
Pranjal Kumar Patel S/o Nandu Prasad Patel R/o Village- Ashram Road,
Raxaul, P.S- Raxaul, Dist- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Haraiya P.S. Case No. 35 of 2025, instituted for the offences
under Sections 21(c), 23(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
10.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39967 of 2025 taking into
consideration the recovery of contraband beyond commercial
quantity.
4. In compliance of the order dated 06.02.2026, a
report dated 20.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9549 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that charge has been framed against the petitioner on
12.02.2026 and out of five prosecution witnesses, no any
witness has been examined in this case. It is further reported that
the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of six months.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 09.04.2025
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that
the continued incarceration of the petitioner without conclusion
of trial amounts to a gross violation of the fundamental right
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which
reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of Judgments.
6. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, the period of custody undergone by the petitioner and
taking into account the fact that continued detention of the
petitioner would serve no purpose other than punitive pretrial
incarceration, which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of
the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to
the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9549 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Haraiya P.S. Case
No. 35 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the
family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…