Allowed¶26

Subodh Kumar @ Majar v. The State of Bihar

Bail granted – NDPS Act (Sections 8(c), 21(b))

Patna HC5 May 2025CR. MISC./26321/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS Act bail Patna High Court; smack recovery from co-accused only; no recovery from petitioner; implication on co-accused statements; co-accused already granted bail by co-ordinate Bench; conditional bail bonds Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; blood-relation bailor; bailor affidavit undertaking; cancellation on two consecutive absences or tampering; Special Judge NDPS Act Purnea; Jankinagar PS Case No.337 of 2024; Supplementary Special Case No.151 of 2024; CR. MISC. No.26321 of 2025; Khatim Reza J.

What did the court decide?

Release of the petitioner on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, NDPS Act, Purnea, in Jankinagar PS Case No.337 of 2024, subject to the four stated conditions. ¶26

Subodh Kumar @ Majar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, booked in Jankinagar PS Case No.337 of 2024 (Sections 8(c) and 21(b), NDPS Act) in which smack was recovered only from co-accused and his linkage rests on co-accused statements, should be released on bail.

¶14

Court's answer

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner is to be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, NDPS Act, Purnea, in Jankinagar PS Case No.337 of 2024.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

Bail is conditioned on the petitioner cooperating in the trial and being properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court; on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶23

Key takeaways

One of the bailors must be the petitioner's own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother, sister or wife.ratio¶23
The bailor must state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other case of similar nature after release, upon which the court below may initiate proceedings for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse.ratio¶23
If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted - NDPS Act (Sections 8(c), 21(b)) - Patna High Court (Khatim Reza, J) allowed the bail application of Subodh Kumar @ Majar in Supplementary Special Case No.151 of 2024 arising out of Jankinagar PS Case No.337 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024 (Purnia). Prosecution case: smack totalling 17.55 gr recovered from three co-accused (6.74 gr, 4.96 gr, 5.85 gm), who identified the petitioner as the smack dealer supplying them; nothing recovered from the petitioner's possession or house. Co-accused Laxman Kumar, Gautam Kumar (s/o Manoj Yadav) and Prabhakar Kumar had already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench (orders dated 07.01.2025 and 19.03.2025). Petitioner in custody since 09.02.2025 with clean antecedents. Released on bail of Rs. 10,000/- with two like sureties before the Special Judge, NDPS Act, Purnea, subject to conditions: cooperation and representation at trial (bond cancellable on two consecutive unjustified absences), one bailor a blood relation, bailor's affidavit undertaking to report future similar accusations, and prosecution liberty to seek cancellation if the petitioner tampers with evidence or witnesses.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26321 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2024 Thana- JANKINAGAR District- Purnia

¶3

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

¶4

Subodh Kumar @ Majar, male, aged about 26 years, S/O Mageshwar Yadav, R/O Village- Rampur Tilak, Ward No. 11, P.S.- Jankinagar, Distt.- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 05-05-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Supplementary Special Case No.151 of 2024 arising out of Jankinagar PS Case No.337 of 2024 dated 17.09.2024, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act.

¶15

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the alleged date and time of occurrence, co-accused, namely Gautam Kumar, son of Ashok Yadav, Prabhakar Kumar, Laxman Kumar and Gautam Kumar son of Manoj Yadav were apprehended by the police and in course of search 6.74 gr. smack was recovered from the possession of Gautam Kumar, son of Ashok Yadav,

¶16

4.96 gr. smack was recovered from Gautam Kumar son of

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26321 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 2/4

¶18

Manoj Yadav and 5.85 gm. Smack was recovered from Laxman Kumar, thus, total 17.55 gr. smack was recovered. On being asked about the source of contraband/smack, all the accused persons told that the petitioner is the smack dealer who brings the smack to their houses and they sale it amongst the boys of the villages.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered either from conscious possession or from the house of the petitioner. It is further submitted that four persons were caught by the police and on being asked about the source of contraband, they told that the petitioner is the main smack dealer who brings the smack to their house and they sale it amongst the boys of the villages. It is further submitted that 6.74 gr. smack was recovered from the possession of Gautam Kumar, son of Ashok Yadav, 4.96 gr. Smack was recovered from Gautam Kumar son of Manoj Yadav and 5.85 gm. smack was recovered from Laxman Kumar but nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Further submission that co-accused Laxman Kumar, Gautam Kumar son of Manoj Kumar Yadav from whose possession contraband was recovered as well as co-accused

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26321 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 3/4

¶21

Prabhakar Kumar have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.85297 of 2024, order dated 19.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.12264 of 2025 and order dated 19.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.7252 of 2025 respectively. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 09.02.2025 having clean antecedents.

¶22

Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶23

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, NDPS Act, Purnea, in Jankinagar PS Case No.337 of 2024, subject to the conditions (i) that the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below, (ii) that one of the bailors will be his own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother, sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other case of

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26321 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 4/4

¶25

similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse, and (iv) that if the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

The application stands allowed.

¶27

(Khatim Reza, J)

¶28

J. Alam/-

¶29

U T

Subodh Kumar @ Majar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subodh Kumar @ Majar 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

the state of bihar and Ors. Vs m/s komal construction chhawani

The State Of Bihar and Ors. Vs Dilip Kumar Munka

Krishna Sharma Vs Ruchi Singh

Wakil Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Thakur @ Vijay Kumar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Lal Babu Ram Vs The State of Bihar