IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31157 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2024 Thana- LAKHAURA District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1. Lalan Kumar son of Bhola Rai Resident of village -chhoka Pakahi, PS- Lakhaura, District -East champaran 2. Ramesh Rai @ Ramesh Kumar Son of Bhola Rai Resident of village -chhoka Pakahi, PS- Lakhaura, District -East champaran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Eashita Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suman Kumari Singh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 4 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Lakhaura P.S. Case No. 204 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(B), 8/20(b)(II)(c), 8(c), 21(c), 23(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. Prosecution case, in short, is that there is recovery of 990 gram of Ganja, 3.280 Kg Charas and 840 grams smack in this case. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. The name of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31157 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026 2/3 petitioners transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. The alleged recovery has been made from co-accused Bhola Rai. The petitioners have not been apprehended on the spot. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioners. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He further submitted that the recovered contraband is above the commercial quantity, hence, there is bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The petitioners do not deserve anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, in my view, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is, hereby, rejected. 8. However, if the petitioners surrenders before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31157 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026 3/3 merit without being prejudiced by this order. manish/- (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) U T