Dismissed¶20

Nandu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC15 Nov 2025CR. MISC./45297/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.45297 of 2025, decided 15-11-2025 by Justice Rajiv Roy (oral order). Nandu Yadav and Chokat Yadav versus The State of Bihar; arising out of Haraiya P.S. Case No. 17 of 2025, District East Champaran, FIR dated 14.02.2025 by informant Anjan Kumar under Sections 8(c)/20(b)(ii)(c), 22(c), 23(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act. Alleged recovery of 48.19 kg and 21.836 kg ganja from two sacks; APP Jitendra Kumar Singh opposed bail citing commercial quantity; counsel Subodh Kumar Barnwal urged false implication. Bail rejected; Trial Court directed to dispose of the trial within one year as petitioners were in custody from 15.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

Bail rejected; however, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of the trial within one year, the petitioners having been in custody since 15.02.2025.

Nandu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45297 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2025 Thana- Haraiya District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Nandu Yadav Son of Chokat Yadav Village- Bhaluwaha PS- Haraiya, DistEast Champaran

¶5

Chokat yadav Son of Late Ramdhyan Yadav Village- Bhaluwaha PSHaraiya, Dist- East Champaran

¶6

... ... petitioners/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the petitioners/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar Barnwal, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

5 15-11-2025 Heard the parties.

¶14

The petitioners are in custody in connection with Haraiya P.S. Case No. 17 of 2025 for the offence punishable under sections 8(c)/20(b)(ii)(c), 22(c), 23(c) and 29 of NDPS Act lodged on 14.02.2025 by the informant, Anjan Kumar.

¶15

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that during patrolling, the petitioners were intercepted and though they tried to throw the sack and escape, were apprehended. There is recovery/seizure of 48.19 kg ganja and 21.836 kg ganja from the two sacks. This led to the FIR.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they reside nearby, someone threw the sacks, the Police has

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45297 of 2025(5) dt.15-11-2025 2/2

¶18

implicated them.

¶19

Learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh opposes the prayer for bail submitting that the recovered/seized material is above the commercial quantity.

¶20

Taking into account the aforesaid facts/allegation, the recovered/seized ganja is/are much above commercial quantity, in that background, this Court is not inclined to extend them the privilege of bail which is accordingly, rejected.

¶21

However, having rejected the bail application, this Court cannot take its eyes away from the fact that the petitioners are in custody from 15.02.2025. As such, they are entitled to an early trial.

¶22

The Trial Court is accordingly directed to look into the matter and see to it that the same is disposed of within a period of one year.

¶23

Vijay Singh/-

¶24

(Rajiv Roy, J)

Nandu Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandu Yadav 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

Geeta Devi Vs The State of Bihar through Sri Dinesh Kumar Rai the District Magistrate

Sunil Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Lal Babu Sah @ Lal Babu Gupta Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjeev Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar Pandit Vs The State of Bihar