Nitish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40905 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2025 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== Nitish Kumar S/O Rajendra Prasad Resident of village- Ishwar Chaudhary Halt, PS- Muffasil, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Brijmohan Das, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil PS Case No. 135 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 8, 20(B)ii(A) of the NDPS Act. 3.

Prosecution allegation, in short, is that total 6.900 Kg ganja was allegedly recovered from the Scooty of the petitioner, during patrolling.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet been submitted in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40905 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/2 further submits petitioner has no concern with the recovered contraband and in this connection, learend counsel for the petitioner submits that recovery is planted and he has become victim of the circumstances. The recovered contraband is below the commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not applicable in the present case. The petitioner is in custody since 18-02-2025 and has got no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, recovery is below commercial quantity and the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Muffasil PS Case No. 135 of 2025.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T