Dismissed¶23

Abdullah v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Oct 2025CR. MISC./60815/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Criminal Miscellaneous No.60815 of 2025; Ashok Kumar Pandey (J); bail rejected; NDPS Act Sections 20 & 22; Section 414 IPC; ganja 400 kg commercial quantity; truck AS01LC-1035; driver; P.S. Case No. 13/2024 Panchrukhi Siwan; custody since 24.01.2024; earlier bail rejection 16.01.2025; charges framed 20.08.2025 no prosecution witness examined; trial to be concluded within six months; renewal of bail after six months.

What did the court decide?

Application rejected; petitioner given liberty to renew bail prayer after six months if the trial is not concluded, and trial court directed to conclude the trial within six months. ¶23

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application rejected; petitioner given liberty to renew bail prayer after six months if the trial is not concluded, and trial court directed to conclude the trial within six months.

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner, arraigned for offences under Section 414 IPC and Sections 20 & 22 NDPS Act after 400 kg of ganja (commercial quantity) was recovered from the truck he was driving. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

Regular bail was refused at this stage; in reaching that decision the court took into account that a commercial quantity of ganja had admittedly been recovered from the vehicle which was being driven by the petitioner, and that although charges were framed on 20.08.2025 no prosecution witness had been examined.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.

¶21

Key takeaways

The learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude it within a period of six months.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (CAV order dated 19.09.2025, pronounced/uploaded 09.10.2025) in Criminal Miscellaneous No.60815 of 2025: regular bail application by Abdullah, said to be the driver of the truck (Regn. No. AS01LC-1035) from which 400 kg of ganja was recovered, arising out of P.S. Case No. 13 of 2024, Panchrukhi (Siwan), registered under Section 414 IPC and Sections 20 & 22 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner, in custody since 24.01.2024, had an earlier bail prayer rejected on 16.01.2025 with a direction to the trial court to conclude the trial within six months. The status report showed charges framed on 20.08.2025 and no prosecution witness examined thereafter. Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey, noting that the commercial quantity of ganja was admittedly recovered from the vehicle driven by the petitioner, declined bail at this stage, gave liberty to renew the prayer after six months if the trial is not concluded, and directed the trial court to expedite and conclude the trial within six months. Bail application rejected (NAFR).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60815 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2024 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan

¶3

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

¶4

Abdullah S/o- Mohammed Idris R/o Village- Deviapur P.S.- Mankapur Gonda, U.P.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kanchan Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY CAV ORDER

¶11

5 09-10-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satya

¶13

Nand Shukla, learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 414 of IPC and under Sections 20 & 22 of the NDPS Act.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that altogether 400

¶16

kg of ganja was recovered from a truck having Registration No. AS01LC-1035.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the driver and that he is having no knowledge regarding the recovered substance. It has also been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 24.01.2024. Earlier his prayer for bail was rejected on 16.01.2025 by this Court with an observation that “ the trial court is hereby directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months. ”

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60815 of 2025(5) dt.09-10-2025 2/2

¶19

The status report from the trial court has been called for. From perusal of the said report it is clear that in this case, the charges were framed on 20.08.2025 and till the date of the report, no prosecution witnesses were examined. Admittedly, the commercial quantity of ganja has been recovered from the vehicle which was being driven by this petitioner.

¶20

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.

¶22

Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of six months.

¶23

Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected.

¶24

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶25

Durgesh/-

¶26

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	19.09.2025
Uploading Date	09.10.2025
Transmission Date	09.10.2025

Abdullah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdullah 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

Dhiraj Sahni @ Dhirendra Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Bhola Ray @ Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Mandal @ Mantoo Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sarfaraj Ansari @ Sarfaraj Miyan Vs The Union of India, Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna, Bihar

Mukesh Rai @ Mukesh Ray Vs The State of Bihar