Patna High CourtCR. MISC./68228/2025rejected

Rangbahadur Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-26Justice Smt. Soni Shrivastava3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68228 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2025 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna ====================================================== Rangbahadur Singh S/o Late Mirja Singh R/o Village - Rehi, P.O - Bhanpur, P.S - Dinara, District - Rohtas, Bihar, Pin - 802213 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

The Union of India New Delhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Giri, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Narendra Kumar Singh, APP For the DRI :

Mr. Anshuman Singh, Adv.

Mr. Ranjay Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the DRI.

2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the petitioner in connection with DRI Patna Unit P.S. Case no.27 of 2024-25 registered under sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 and 29 of NDPS Act.

3. There is recovery of 119.560 Kgs. of ganja from a pick-up truck and driver and khalasi of the said truck were apprehended at the spot.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the alleged recovery was made from a secret

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68228 of 2025(7) dt.26-02-2026 2/3 chamber of the pick-up truck, in which the petitioner was merely working as a khalasi (helper). The petitioner had no knowledge that the said vehicle was carrying any narcotic substance. It is further submitted that no recovery has been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner and he has been roped in solely on account of his presence in the vehicle. The petitioner is in custody since 12.01.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the case/trial.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the DRI on the ground that the alleged recovery is commercial quantity and process of search and seizure has been done in presence of two independent witnesses. It has also been submitted, by way of counter affidavit, that after detailed investigation, complaint against the petitioner and co-accused was filed in the learned Court of Sessions Judge/Special Judge, NDPS, Patna.

6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that recovery of alleged ganja is that of commercial quantity, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the application is rejected.

7. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68228 of 2025(7) dt.26-02-2026 3/3 renew his prayer for bail, in case no substantial progress is made in the case.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Harsh/- U T