Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3552 (PAT)

Ravi Kumar v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./18661/2026 · 2026-03-24

Ashok Kumar Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18661 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-286 Year-2025 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL District- Begusarai ====================================================== Ravi Kumar S/O Shikant Prasad Yadav @ Shivkant Yadav R/O Village- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Sahebpur Kamal, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 2 24-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 68 of 2025 arising out of Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 286 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8/21(c)/22(c) of the NDPS Act. 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the bike of this petitioner, altogether 200 grams of smack like contraband was recovered. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and the police has not complied with Section 105 of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18661 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026 2/2 BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits that the alleged recovery of contraband is though more than small quantity but is much less than commercial quantity. Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 02.10.2025. 5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Begusarai in connection with NDPS P.S. Case No. 68 of 2025 arising out of Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 286 of 2025. Sudhanshu/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) U T