Sanjeet Kumar Giri @ Sanjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28538 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-606 Year-2021 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== Sanjeet Kumar Giri @ Sanjeet Kumar Son of Vijay Giri Resident of Dudhi Chak, P.S.- Masaurhi, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20 and 22 of the NDPS Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of four cases as would manifest from the supplementary affidavit and out of the four cases, two cases are under the NDPS Act. It is further submitted that the informant alleges that an information was received that petitioner along with Guddu were selling Ganja near a palm tree, accoridngly, the police reached the place of occurrence but the accused fled away and 4 Kg. of Ganja was recovered from the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and based on an information, it is alleged that the police reached the place of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28538 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026 2/2 occrrence from where 4 Kg. of Ganja was recovered. It is further submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the recovered Ganja was less than commercial quantity and petitioner is in custody since 24.02.2026.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has antecedent of four cases out of which, two cases are unde the NDPS Act, as such, it appears that petitioner is a habitual offender but then fairly submits that the Ganja recovered is not of commercial quantity but is more than small quantity.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail in connection with Masaurhi P.S. Case No. 606 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS, Patna/Successor Court.

7. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected.

8. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T