Arjun Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11872 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2025 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria ====================================================== Arjun Yadav S/o Lal Yadav @ Jay Lal Yadav R/o Village - Bishanpur, P.S - Jogbani, District - Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 23-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No.60 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8 & 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that SSB personnel received an information that ganja is to be transported near Bishunpur border pillar no. 176/01. On this information, the informant constituted a team and reached near Bishunpur village. At 19:00 hrs, he found that some suspected persons are coming from the side of Nepal on a bike. When the informant and his associates tried to intercept them, they started fleeing away. They were being chased but they fled away leaving the bike and bag. After that some informers have disclosed that the petitioner along with others were on the bike and from that bike in two bags altogether 29 kg of ganja was recovered.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11872 of 2026(3) dt.23-03-2026 2/2 of this petitioner and from perusal of the FIR itself it is clear that it is not disclosed in the FIR as to who has named the petitioner. The petitioner is not concerned in any way with the bike. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and police has not complied Section 105 of the BNSS while making seizure. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 11.10.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and he has submitted that the petitioner is having criminal antecedeent of two cases.
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 court of Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (NDPS Act), Araria in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No.60 of 2025. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T