Allowed¶19

Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Jul 2026CR. MISC./46763/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted; NDPS Act Sections 20, 21; brown sugar 10 grams below commercial quantity; Section 37 NDPS inapplicability urged; Sections 42, 50 NDPS and Section 103 BNSS 2023 compliance urged; Ladaniya/Ladania P.S. Case No. 190 of 2026; GR Case No. 59 of 2026; Madhubani; custody since 17.05.2026; bail bond Rs. 15,000 with two sureties; Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 46763 of 2026; decided 21-07-2026; Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted; petitioner to be released on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court in connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 190 of 2026, GR Case No. 59 of 2026. ¶19

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 190 of 2026 / GR Case No. 59 of 2026, instituted for offences under Sections 20, 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶13

Court's answer

The Court was inclined to grant bail considering that the recovered contraband was less than the commercial quantity and the period of custody undergone by the petitioner.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court, in connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 190 of 2026 and GR Case No. 59 of 2026.

¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NDPS bail — Patna High Court (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J.) granted bail in Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 190 of 2026, GR Case No. 59 of 2026 (Sections 20, 21, N.D.P.S. Act). Prosecution case: acting on secret information police raided a hut where the petitioner and two others were allegedly consuming brown sugar, recovering 10 grams of brown sugar, a digital weighing machine, two lighters and a mobile phone from the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner urged false implication, custody since 17.05.2026, no criminal antecedent, no conscious possession, recovery below commercial quantity (so Section 37 NDPS inapplicable) and non-compliance of Sections 42 and 50 NDPS Act and Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Granting bail, the Court considered that the recovered contraband was less than the commercial quantity and the period of custody undergone; release ordered on bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46763 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2026 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

Rahul Kumar Son of Pawan Sahni Resident of Village - Inarwa, Goth, Ward No. - 06, Police Station - Deodha, District - Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 21-07-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case No. 190 of 2026, GR Case No. 59 of 2026 instituted for the offences under Sections 20, 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶14

Prosecution case, in short, is that, acting on secret information, the police raided a hut where the petitioner and two others were allegedly consuming brown sugar, and recovered 10 grams of brown sugar, a digital weighing machine, two lighters, and a mobile phone from the petitioner.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46763 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 2/3

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is in custody since 17.05.2026 and has no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The recovered contraband is below commercial quantity, and hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not applicable in the present case. There is no compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act as also Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶17

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, recovered contraband being less than the commercial quantity as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46763 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 3/3

¶21

below/concerned Court in connection with Ladaniya P.S. Case

¶22

No. 190 of 2026, GR Case No. 59 of 2026.

¶23

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶24

Alok Verma/-

¶25

U T

Rahul Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul 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

Sipahi Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nikesh Kumar Bahardar @ Nikesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Niraj Kumar @ Niraj Basfore @ Musa Vs The State of Bihar