Jai Prakash Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pintu Kumar Patel, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 23-02-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks regular bail in Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 577 of 2025 dated 01.11.2025, registered under Sections 21, 25, 29 and 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

¶15

The allegation is of recovery of altogether 16 grams of a cocaine-like substance, packed in twelve packets, from inside an iron hole made in the chassis in front of the right-side rear tyre of a white- coloured Magic Pick-Up van bearing Registration No. BR-21E-4984.

¶16

4.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2658 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026 2/3

¶18

present case. It is submitted that no contraband has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner; rather, the alleged contraband was recovered from the pick-up van bearing Registration No. BR-21E-4984.It is next submitted that although the recovered quantity of contraband is more than a small quantity, it is much less than the commercial quantity as prescribed under the N.D.P.S. Act. It is further submitted that there is no independent witness to the seizure list, which was prepared only in the presence of police personnel and the provisions of Section 105 of the B.N.S.S. were not complied with by the police while preparing the seizure list. It is further submitted that the petitioner along with two other persons, namely Anil Yadav and Chhotu Kumar were apprehended at the spot with the pick-up van and the said co-accused persons have already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1599 of 2026. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.11.2025 and has no criminal antecedents.

¶19

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer.

¶20

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2658 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026 3/3

¶22

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 learned Court of Principal Sessions Judge XI-cum- Special Judge, Nalanda, Biharsharif or successor Court in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 577 of 2025.

¶23

The application stands allowed.

¶24

(Khatim Reza, J)

¶25

shyambihari/-

¶26

U

Jai Prakash Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Prakash 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subash Tiwari Vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Urban Development And Housing

M/S New Kohli Sports, Vs The State of Bihar through Director

Ram Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Mannu Kumar @ Manu Kumar @ Abhimannu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Shyambabu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar