Bajrangi Kumar @ Karn Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36647 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2026 Thana- PARSABAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== Bajrangi Kumar @ Karn Kumar Son of Krishna Prasad Resident of MohallaGayatri Nagar Kurthaul, P.S.- Parasa-Bazar, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-06-2026 Heard Mr. Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 25.01.2026 in Special Case No. 66 of 2026 arising out of Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 17 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 09.01.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 111(2) (b) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita Act and 8(C) and 21 (b) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.
3. Recovery is of 7.12 gram of Smack/Brown Sugar and four mobile phones.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36647 of 2026(2) dt.15-06-2026 2/3 seizure list that nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner rather the recovery of contraband has been made from the co-accused persons, namely, Amit Kumar and Ravi Kumar and name of the petitioner has been transpired in this case merely on the basis of confessional statement of the said Amit Kumar and Ravi Kumar. He next submits that and except the disclosure made by apprehended coaccused persons, no other cogent material has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. He further submits that there is noncompliance of the mandatory provision of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act and it appears that the recovered contraband is less than the commercial quantity. Hence, there is no embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S Act for grant of bail to the petitioner.The petitioner is in custody since 25.01.2026. 5 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge (N.D.P.S Act) Court No.1, Patna in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36647 of 2026(2) dt.15-06-2026 3/3 with Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No. 17 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T