Allowed

Jayram Bharti@Jayram Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Dec 2025CR. MISC./85076/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under NDPS Act after recovery of 1.528 kg opium from petitioner; counsel cited non-compliance with Section 105 BNSS and quantity below commercial threshold. Court heard both sides and enlarged petitioner on bail on bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of like amount before Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS Act), Patna.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85076 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-364 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Jayram Bharti@Jayram Kumar S/O Prabhu Bharati Resident Of Village - Barura, P.S.- Kunda, District- Chatra (Jharkhand).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Javed Jafar Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Anita Kumari, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 16-12-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

¶15

with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 364 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 17(c), 18(c), 25, 29, 31, 61 of the N.D.P.S. Act

¶16

The case of the prosecution in short is that four persons were apprehended and different amounts of contraband were recovered from them. From the possession of this petitioner, a total of 1.528 kg of opium was recovered.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of this

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85076 of 2025(2) dt.16-12-2025 2/2

¶19

petitioner. The police have not followed Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure and the witnesses of the seizure are police personnel. It has also been submitted that the alleged recovery is though more than small quantity but is much less than commercial quantity. He further submits that a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 29.08.2025.

¶20

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Patna in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 364 of 2025.

¶22

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶23

Sudhanshu/- U T

Jayram Bharti@Jayram Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayram Bharti@Jayram Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Shambhu Sao @ Shambhu Nath Gupta @ Shumbhu Sao Vs The State of Bihar

Harshbardhan Mehra Vs The State of Bihar

Sri Shankar Lal Agrawal Vs Sri Nimai Chand Das

Urmila Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Rina Devi Vs The State of Bihar