Md. Harun v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Jul 2025CR. MISC./19964/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS bail; Patna High Court; CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19964 of 2025; Sourendra Pandey J; Sections 8(c) and 21(b) N.D.P.S. Act; Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act compliance raised; 88.60 grams smack-like substance recovered; Dighal Bank P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025; Kishanganj; bail-bonds Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties; custody since 07.01.2025; bail granted subject to conditions including antecedent verification; application allowed 17-07-2025.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to both petitioners on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, Kishanganj, subject to five conditions stated in the order. ¶¶27

Md. Harun Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, arrayed in a case registered under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act (Dighal Bank P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025), are entitled to regular bail.

¶¶14

Court's answer

Considering the submissions of both sides, the Court enlarged both petitioners on regular bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, Kishanganj, subject to specified conditions (close-relative bailor, attendance when required, cancellation on absence/violation, liberty to prosecute for cancellation on future similar involvement, and verification of criminal antecedents without delaying acceptance of bail bonds).

¶¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Sourendra Pandey, J), oral order dated 17-07-2025 in CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19964 of 2025 arising out of Dighal Bank P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025 (District Kishanganj): application of petitioners Md. Harun and Anarul Haque for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act stands allowed. Prosecution case records recovery of 88.60 grams of smack-like substance from the petitioners' possession; defence counsel contended innocence, intermediary (non-commercial) quantity, non-compliance with Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act procedure, clean antecedents and custody since 07.01.2025; the APP opposed. Bail granted on bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount, subject to conditions including a close-relative bailor, presence on dates fixed by the trial court, cancellation of bonds on absence/violation, liberty to the prosecution to seek cancellation on future similar involvement, and verification of criminal antecedents without delaying acceptance of bail bonds.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19964 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2025 Thana- DIGHALBANK District- Kishanganj

¶3

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

¶4

Md. Harun S/O Rafique Alam R/O Village- Mohamari, P.S- Dighal Bank, Distt.- Kishanganj.

¶5

Anarul Haque S/O Nurshed R/O Village- Mohamari, P.S- Dighal Bank, Distt.- Kishanganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Md. Shah Nawaz Ali, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 17-07-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶13

A.P.P for the State.

¶14

2 . The petitioners seek regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶15

3 . As per the prosecution case, total 88.60 grams of smack like substance was recovered from the possession of the petitioners.

¶16

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19964 of 2025(4) dt.17-07-2025 2/3

¶18

possession of the petitioners. It is next submitted that seized contraband is of intermediary quantity and much less than the commercial quantity. It is also submitted that the procedure under Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act has also not been followed. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedent and are in custody since 07.01.2025.

¶19

5 . Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

¶20

6 . Considering the aforesaid submissions of the parties, let the petitioners above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Kishanganj, in connection with Dighal Bank P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-

¶21

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.

¶22

(ii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the learned Trial Court.

¶23

(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioners will be liable to be canceled by the Court concerned.

¶24

(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bonds.

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19964 of 2025(4) dt.17-07-2025 3/3

¶26

(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of the same or in the name of verification.

¶27

7. The application stands allowed.

¶28

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

¶29

Jyoti/-

¶30

U T

Md. Harun v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Harun 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhiraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nagdiya Ram @ Mukesh Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Shesh Kumar @ Sheshnath Kumar @ Sheshnath Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Anil ram Vs The State of Bihar

Alok Sahni @ Alakh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raja Kumar Vs The State of Bihar