Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18302/2026dismissed

Rajnish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-31Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18302 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2026 Thana- DAWATH District- Rohtas ====================================================== Rajnish Kumar S/O Santosh Kumar Singh R/O Village- Dhawai, P.S.- Dawath, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv.

Mr.Gaurav Govind For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 31-03-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dawath P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 registered for the offence under Sections 22(B) of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, from the business premises of M/s Sarpanch Medical, the recovery is of 29 pieces of Buprenorphine Injection I.P. Dolphine of 2 ml each, 880 pieces of Diclofenace Sodium Injection I.P. 75 mg/2ml Leefort of 2ml each, 260 piece of Phentermine Maleate Injection I.P. Avil of 2 ml each, 50 pieces of Dispo Van single use Hypodermic needles and from there the petitioner was caught when he was trying to flee.

4. The petitioner is in custody since 8.1.2026.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18302 of 2026(2) dt.31-03-2026 2/2

5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, though has tried to defend his client but he could not give any explanation for the alleged recovery.

6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further, has produced the drug license issued in the name of the father of the petitioner but he has not been able to provide any purchase details of the injections and other articles which have been seized from the premises of Sarpanch Medical.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, it is clear that the petitioner has been involved in dealing with Narcotics Substances and therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.

9. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U