Allowed¶20

Raju Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Apr 2026CR. MISC./19066/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.19066 of 2026, decided 20-04-2026; Raju Kumar v. The State of Bihar; regular bail; NDPS Act sections 8(c), 21(b), 29; BNS Section 111(2)(b); heroin 21.15 grams; Bidupur P.S. Case No. 698 of 2025, District Vaishali; defence plea of no independent witness to seizure list and non-compliance with Section 105 BNSS; contraband less than commercial quantity; custody since 18.12.2025; bail bond Rs.10,000/- with two sureties; Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted; petitioner to be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions cum Special Judge NDPS Act, Vaishali at Hajipur. ¶20

Raju Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19066 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-698 Year-2025 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

Raju Kumar Son of Kedar Ray Resident of Village- Chakwara, P.S.- Hajipur Town, Dist- Vaishali

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aniket Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 20-04-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 8(c), 21(b), 29 of the NDPS Act and Section 111(2)(b) of BNS.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that from the possession of this petitioner altogether 21.15 grams of heroin was recovered.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He has been falsely implicated. There is no independent witness of the seizure list. Police has not followed Section 105 of BNSS while

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19066 of 2026(3) dt.20-04-2026 2/2

¶18

preparing the seizure list. Though the alleged contraband is more than small quantity but is much less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.12.2025.

¶19

Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

¶20

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 released on bail in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 698 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions cum Special Judge NDPS Act, Vaishali at Hajipur.

¶21

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶22

Shubham/-

Raju Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Kumar 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

Satendra Rai @ Satendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Sah @ Arbind Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Sao @ Pramod Shah @ Pramod Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Ankit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ankit Kumar Singh @ Ankit Singh @ Ankit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar