Rajdeep Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65122 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2025 Thana- Arar District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.

Rajdeep Kumar son of Sunil Kumar Resident of Village- Bhaddi Fari tola, P.S.- Pastpur, District- Saharsa 2.

Rajnish Raj @ Nitish Kumar Son of Umakant yadav Resident Of VIllage - Surmaha ward no. 3, Ps- Pastpar, dist- Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ruchi Mandal, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP For the Informant/s :

Mr. Kumar Gautam, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Arar, Madhepura P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025 dated 29.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 8(c) and 21(b) of Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic substances Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 10.91 grams of Smack (Heroine) was recovered from the possession of the petitioner no.2 and a motorcycle was also recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65122 of 2025(2) dt.13-10-2025 2/2 implicated in this case. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. The petitioner no.1 is the rider and the petitioner no.2 is the pillion rider of the seized motorcycle. The seized contraband is less than the commercial quantity. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated at para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioners are in custody since 30.06.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioners.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioners above-named, are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Madhepura, in connection with Arar, Madhepura P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T