Arvind Kumar @ Arbind Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28928 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2025 Thana- Basmatia District- Araria ====================================================== Arvind Kumar @ Arbind Paswan S/o Kulanand Paswan Resident Of VillageBasmatiya, Ward No 6, P.S.- Basmatiya, Dist.- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mandal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 22-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Basmatiya P.S. Case No. 60 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act, Sections 25(1-b)a and 26 of the Arms Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the house of this petitioner, altogether 20.5 kg of ganja in two plastic sacks and some Nepali currency and a pistol made in USA were recovered.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28928 of 2026(3) dt.22-06-2026 2/2 the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel, and the police have not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits that the weight of the contraband is with sacks, and if the weight of the sacks is deducted, the contraband will fall below the commercial quantity. Moreover, a statement has been made in paragraph 3 of the petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 08.12.2025.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that from the possession of this petitioner, commercial quantity of ganja has been recovered. He also submits that from perusal of the case diary, it is clear that the charge-sheet has been filed after the FSL report.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage, however, he may renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.

7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within the stipulated period of time. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T