IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20426 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2025 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Ankush Kumar S/o Chhathu Chaudhary Resident of village - Kurmi Tola Anaith, P.S - Ara Nawada, District - Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 24-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No.354 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that altogether from a swift dzire car, two packets containing 523 gm and 524 gm heroin each, altogether 1047 gm of heroin was recovered. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is driver of the said car. It has further been submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20426 of 2026(3) dt.24-04-2026 2/2 for the petitioner has further submitted that from perusal of the FIR itself it will transpire that on being asked, the petitioner has disclosed that he was carrying the consignement for Abhishek and on his disclosure the documents of the car were recovered from the house of co-accused Abhishek and contraband was also recoverd from his possession. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that similarly situated co-accused Indrajit Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 75224 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 30.05.2025. 5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State. Learned APP has submitted that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case of similar nature. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, however, he may renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial. durgesh/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) U T