Dismissed¶22

Sunil Kumar Mandal v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Jul 2026CR. MISC./29784/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejected; NDPS Act; Patna High Court; Harish Kumar, J; Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29784 of 2026; Sunil Kumar Mandal; Special (NDPS) Case No. 15 of 2024; Mahishi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2024; Saharsa; Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 & 29 NDPS Act; 23.6 kgs ganja; conscious possession; third bail application; prior rejections 18.09.2024 (Cr.Misc. No. 48103 of 2024) and 23.07.2025 (Cr.Misc. No. 23831 of 2025); custody since 29.03.2024; charge framed 24.09.2024; seven prosecution witnesses examined; trial to conclude within four months; fresh bail application permitted if trial not concluded.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file a fresh bail application if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated four-month period; otherwise no relief granted. ¶22

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file a fresh bail application if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated four-month period; otherwise no relief granted.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner, in custody since 29.03.2024 in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 15 of 2024 (Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 & 29 of NDPS Act), in what is his third bail attempt.

¶14

Court's answer

Regular bail refused: since the alleged narcotic substance was recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, the Court did not accede to the prayer for grant of regular bail, and the application stands rejected.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The learned trial Court is expected to take all endeavour to conclude the trial preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

¶23

Key takeaways

In case the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court again by filing a fresh application.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Harish Kumar), by order dated 10.07.2026 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29784 of 2026, rejected Sunil Kumar Mandal's third application for regular bail. The petitioner is in custody since 29.03.2024 in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 15 of 2024, arising out of Mahishi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2024 (District Saharsa), registered for offences punishable under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 & 29 of the NDPS Act. Earlier bail prayers were turned down on 18.09.2024 (Cr.Misc. No. 48103 of 2024) and dealt with on 23.07.2025 (Cr.Misc. No. 23831 of 2025, where withdrawal was sought), the Court having then noted recovery of 23.6 kgs ganja from the petitioner's conscious possession. With the trial near completion - charge framed on 24.09.2024, seven prosecution witnesses including the informant and I.O. examined, and only one seizure list witness remaining - the Court declined bail on the ground of recovery from conscious possession, directed the trial Court to conclude the trial preferably within four months of receipt/production of the order's copy, and permitted the petitioner to file a fresh application if the trial is not concluded within that period.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29784 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2024 Thana- MAHISHI District- Saharsa

¶3

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

¶4

Sunil Kumar Mandal S/o Badri Narayan Mandal R/o Village - Bhaptiyahi, Ward no. 06, P.S. - Bhaptiyahi, District - Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 10-07-2026

¶12

Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the

¶13

learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 15 of 2024, arising out of Mahishi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 & 29 of NDPS Act.

¶15

This is the third attempt made on behalf of the petitioner as earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was turned down by this court on 18.09.2024 in Cr.Misc. No. 48103 of 2024. Subsequently, on 23.07.2025 in Cr.Misc. No. 23831 of 2025, wherein the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the present application. While rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner, this Court has taken note of the fact that the 23.6 kgs

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29784 of 2026(3) dt.10-07-2026 2/3

¶17

Ganja was recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and others. On the last occasion when the matter was taken up, the status report was called for pursuant thereto. This Court is informed that the charge has been framed on 24.09.2024 and the prosecution has altogether examined, seven prosecution witnesses in this case including the informant and I.O. Only one seizure list witness remained to be examined.

¶18

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that till date the trial has not been concluded and now the petitioner has been incarcerated since 29.03.2024 more than two years have been lapsed. He further submits that the petitioner also having fair antecedent and he will fully co-operate in the proceeding of the Court and keeping him behind the bar for such a long period would cause prejudice to the petitioner, in case he would be finally acquitted.

¶19

On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the prayer for bail has already been turned down earlier and now the trial is at the fag end and there is every likelihood that the same shall be concluded within a period of four months.

¶20

Considering the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29784 of 2026(3) dt.10-07-2026 3/3

¶22

that the alleged narcotic substance has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner, this Court is not acceded to the prayer of the petitioner for grant of regular bail . Accordingly, the same stands rejected.

¶23

However, it is expected that the learned trial Court shall take all endeavor to conclude the trial preferably within a period of four months from the date of the receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶24

It is made clear that, in case, the trial is not concluded within the period stipulated, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach before this Court by filing a fresh application.

¶25

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶26

sumit/-

Sunil Kumar Mandal v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Mandal 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

Ahmad Raza Vs The State of Bihar

Mr. Radha Mohan Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Rajeshwar Dayal Vs The State of Bihar

Rajeev Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar, through the Additional Chief Secretary, Education Department

Shashi Bhushan Prasad Vs The Magadh University

Bimla Paul Vs The State of Bihar