Mubarak Hussain Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10814 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-922 Year-2024 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Mubarak Hussain Son of Md. Ibrahim Resident of Telniya Rahika Ward No.3, P.S. - Dagarua, District - Purnea

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Fazle Karim, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 25-04-2025 Heard Mr. Md Fazle Karim, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.

¶11

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 114 of 2024, arising out of Katihar Nagar P.S. Case No. 922 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(b) and 22(b) of the NDPS Act.

¶12

Prosecution allegation, in short, is that there is recovery of total 206.53 gm smack out of which 103.6 gm smack has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10814 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025 2/3

¶15

present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of smack. The recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not applicable in the present case. The petitioner is in custody since 03.12.2024 and has got no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identically situated co-accused has been enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 13-02-2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6065 of 2025.

¶16

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the recovered contraband being below the commercial quantity, claim based on parity and the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶18

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10814 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025 3/3

¶20

below/concerned Court in connection with NDPS Case No. 114 of 2024, arising out of Katihar Nagar P.S. Case No. 922 of 2024.

¶21

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶22

Raj Kishore/- U T

Mubarak Hussain v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mubarak Hussain v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munna Singh @ Krishna Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Niraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rewat Prasad Yadav @ Rewat Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Rishi Kumar @ Rishi Babu Vs The State of Bihar

Vikrama Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Mukhlal Rai Vs The State of Bihar