Aakash Shrichand Sohanda v. The Director Of Revenue Intelligence(Dri), Regional Unit, Patna.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21149 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2026 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna ====================================================== Aakash Shrichand Sohanda Son of Shrichand Murlidhar Sohanda @ Shrichand Murlidhar Sohanda R/o E-15, New Neelkanth Chawl, Near Chirag Hotel, Opposite Basant Vihar, P.S. - Hill Line, Ulhasnagar, Dist. - Thane, Maharashtra, 421005.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Director of Revenue Intelligence(DRI), Regional Unit, Patna. Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Aryan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr Krishna Nandan Singh (ASG) Mr. Anshuman Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-04-2026 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the DRI.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with DRI Patna Unit Case No. 26 of 2025-26, registered for offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B), 23(b), and 29 of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, 8.144 kg of hydroponic weed (ganja) has been recovered from a trolley belonging to the petitioner.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. The petitioner is in custody since 07.01.2026 and claims to have a clean antecedent. It is further submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21149 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026 2/2 quantity of ganja recovered is an intermediate quantity; therefore, the petitioner may be granted bail.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the DRI vehemently opposes the bail application.

6. Considering the huge recovery of hydroponic weed (ganja), this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the application for regular bail stands rejected for the present. However, if the trial is delayed by the DRI, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely to the adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any manner. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T