Patna High CourtCR. MISC./31587/2026dismissed

Pulkit Sada v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-14Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31587 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2025 Thana- RATANPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Pulkit Sada S/O Late Satain Sada R/O Vill.- Piprahi, Piprahipatti, Ward No. 1, P.s.- Ratanpur, District- Sapaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 14-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.86 of 2025, arising out of Ratanpura P.S. Case No.65 of 2025 registered for the offence under sections 8/20(B) (ii)(C)/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. It is alleged that 127 kilograms of ganja was recovered from a bush situated near the bank of the Koshi River and the petitioner allegedly fled away from the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. Petitioner is in custody since 20.12.2025. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused person namely Sahdeo Ray @ Kialu Ray @ Sahdev Rai @ Keelu Rai has been granted bail by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31587 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026 2/2 this Court on 26.03.2026 in Cr. Misc. No. 6233 of 2026.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that there exists prima facie material against the petitioner indicating his involvement in the commission of the offence.

6. Considering the huge recovery of ganja, which is much more than the commercial quantity, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands dismissed. It is made clear that the similarly situated co-accused namely, Sahdeo Ray @ Kialu Ray @ Sahdev Rai @ Keelu Rai, was granted bail only because he was aged about 68 years and this ground is not applicable in the case of the petitioner, who is only 48 years old.

8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of 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