Prakash Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44316 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2026 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Prakash kumar Son of Late Umesh Mahto @ Umesh Mahato Resident of Village- Katahara, Harpur, P.S.- Kathara, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md Ziaul Quamar, Advocate.

Ms. Puja Kumari, Advocate.

Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the possession of this petitioner, altogether 79 grams of heroin like contraband was recovered.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that 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 the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44316 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 2/2 police personnel and the police has not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits that the alleged recovery of contraband is though more than small quantity but is much less than commercial quantity. Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 27.04.2026.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, Vaishali in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 309 of 2026. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T