Dismissed¶23

Chandan Kumar Jha v. The Union of India through Dri, Patna

Patna HC11 Feb 2026CR. MISC./74259/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.74259 of 2025, decided 11-02-2026 by Justice Soni Shrivastava: bail rejected under Sections 20(b), 25 & 29 N.D.P.S. Act where petitioner was driver of truck carrying 382.500 kgs ganja; parity with bailed co-accused (Cr. Misc. Nos. 42392/2024, 84243/2024, 44796/2025) and over four years' custody did not sway the Court as trial was at fag end with seven of ten witnesses examined; trial court directed to finish trial within four months. Relevant for NDPS bail, commercial quantity, driver-role and delay-based bail arguments in Patna High Court.

What did the court decide?

Bail declined because the trial has reached the fag end and only three prosecution witnesses remain to be examined. ¶21

Chandan Kumar Jha Vs The Union of India through Dri, Patna — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74259 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2021 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Chandan Kumar Jha S/O Late Pramod Kumar Jha Resident of village -Bariyarpur, P.S- Sakra, Dist.- Muzaffarpur

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Union of India through DRI, Patna Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Sr. SC : Mr. Ankit Kumar Singh, Jr. SC : Ms. Aradhna Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Akash Deep, Advocate ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 11-02-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Union of India through DRI, Patna.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for

¶14

the offence punishable under Sections 20(b), 25 & 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is the driver of the alleged truck and he is actively involved in trafficking of ganja and huge quantity of ganja i.e. 382.500 kgs has been recovered.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been made an accused in this case only on account of the fact that he was the driver of the vehicle from

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74259 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 2/3

¶18

which the seizure was made. It has been submitted that the petitioner was not aware of the fact that ganja was kept in the vehicle and further, other co-accused persons, being the owner of the truck and the passengers of the other vehicle, which was moving along with the said truck, have been granted the privilege of bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide order dated 03.12.2024, 18.04.2025 and 01.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.42392 of 2024, Cr. Misc. No.84243 of 2024 and Cr. Misc. No.44796 of 2025 respectively. The petitioner is in custody since 21.09.2021 i.e. for more than four years and with no criminal antecedent.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Union of India, through

¶20

DRI submitting that the present case involves commercial quantity of ganja having been recovered in the vehicle in question which was being driven by the petitioner, coupled with the fact that seven out of ten witnesses have already been examined by the prosecution, opposed the bail application of the present petitioner.

¶21

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering the fact that the case has reached at the fag end and only three witnesses are remaining to be examined on behalf of the prosecution, this Court is not

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74259 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 3/3

¶23

inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No.133 of 2021 (arising out of DRI file no.DRI/LZU/PRU/718(II)/ENQ10/2021-2022, unit Case No.05/2021-2022).

¶24

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to proceed expeditiously and conclude the trial, preferably, within a period of four months from today without giving any unnecessary adjournments to any of the accused persons.

¶25

(Soni Shrivastava, J)

¶26

anand/-

¶27

U T

Chandan Kumar Jha v. The Union of India through Dri, Patna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Kumar Jha v. The Union of India through Dri, Patna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baidhnath Paswan @ Baidhnath Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Kuldeep Sada Vs The State Of Bihar

Mukund Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Saddam Khan Vs The State of Bihar

Kamleshwari Thakur @ Ranjeet Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Singh @ Rahul Sahni Vs The State of Bihar