Allowed¶23

Sudhir Kumar v. The State of Bihar

NDPS Act, 1985 – Regular bail

Patna HC21 Jan 2026CR. MISC./70727/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Conditional regular bail, NDPS Act 1985 Sections 8(C), 21(B), 22/29; Beur P.S. Case No. 440 of 2025, Patna; recovery of 46 grams smack-like substance from petitioner No. 1 and mobile phone from petitioner No. 2; seizure list signatures objection; quantity between small and commercial; criminal antecedents; custody since 17-08-2025; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; Sessions Judge/Special Judge NDPS Patna; CR. MISC. No.70727 of 2025; decided 21-01-2026; Justice Khatim Reza.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to both petitioners on bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge NDPS Patna, subject to five specified conditions. ¶23

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners should be released on regular bail in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 440 of 2025 registered under Sections 8(C), 21(B) and 22/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

On consideration of the facts, circumstances and submissions, the petitioners were ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge NDPS Patna, in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 440 of 2025.

¶20

Key takeaways

The bail grant was made subject to five conditions: cooperation in trial and representation on every date (failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason permitting cancellation); one bailor to be the petitioner's own blood relation; bailors to affirm on affidavit that they will inform the court of any later similar accusation, failing which cancellation proceedings may follow; liberty to the prosecution to seek cancellation on tampering with evidence or witnesses; and monthly appearance before the concerned SHO in the first week until framing of charge.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NDPS Act, 1985 — Regular bail — Patna High Court (Khatim Reza, J) allowed bail to two accused in Beur P.S. Case No. 440 of 2025 (Sections 8(C), 21(B) and 22/29 NDPS Act). Allegation: 46 grams of smack-like substance recovered from the pocket of petitioner No. 1; one mobile phone recovered from the possession of petitioner No. 2. Counsel submitted that the petitioners' signatures were not obtained on the seized articles (P1) in the seizure list contrary to NDPS Act provisions, that the seized quantity was more than small but less than commercial quantity, and that petitioner No. 1 had no criminal antecedents while petitioner No. 2 had one pending case; petitioners in custody since 17-08-2025. Bail granted on Rs.10,000/- bond each with two like-amount sureties before the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge NDPS Patna, conditioned on trial cooperation, a blood-relation bailor, bailor affidavit regarding future similar accusations, no tampering, and monthly appearance before the SHO till framing of charge.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70727 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-440 Year-2025 Thana- BEUR District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Sudhir Kumar S/O Late Devendra Ray R/O Kila Ghat, P.S.- Chowk, District- Patna

¶5

Karan Kumar @ Karn Kumar S/O Omprakash Sao R/O Damriya Siri Ghat, P.S.- Malsalami, Dist.- Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sabal Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 21-01-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶13

A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioners seek regular bail in Beur P.S. Case No. 440 of 2025 dated 16-08-2025 registered under Sections 8( C), 21(B) and 22/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶15

The allegation is of recovery of 46 grams of smacklike substance from the pocket of petitioner No. 1, namely Sudhir Kumar whereas, one mobile phone is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of petitioner No. 2, namely Karan Kumar @ Karn Kumar.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70727 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026 2/3

¶18

petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. Referring to the seizure list, which forms part of the FIR (Annexure-1), it is submitted that the seized articles marked as P1 wherein, the signatures of the petitioners were not taken which is contrary to the provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is further submitted that the seized smack like substance is more than the small quantity, but less than the commercial quantity under the N.D.P.S. Act. Lastly, it is submitted that petitioner No. 1 has no criminal antecedents, whereas petitioner No. 2 has one criminal case pending against him. The petitioners have been in custody since 17-08-2025.

¶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 the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge NDPS Patna, in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 440 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70727 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026 3/3

¶22

(i) that the petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below, (ii) that one of the bailors will be their own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother, sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailors shall also state on affidavit that they will inform the court concerned if the petitioners are made accused in any other case of similar nature after their release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse, (iv) that if the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail, and (v) that the petitioners will appear before the SHO of concerned PS in the first week of each month till framing of charge in the case.

¶23

The application stands allowed.

¶24

(Khatim Reza, J)

¶25

shyambihari/-

¶26

U T

Sudhir Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir 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

Abdur Raquib Vs Md. Yousuf

Shiv Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar Yadav @ Nitish Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Kiran Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Awadhesh Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar