Nandlal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80523 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-280 Year-2025 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Nandlal Kumar S/O Nagina Mahto @ Nagendra Mahto R/O Village- Chauhan Chhapra, P.S- Phenhara, Dist.- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dhaka P.S. Case No. 280 of 2025, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 17(c), 18(c), 21(c), 25, 29 and 31 of the NDPS Act.

3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that there is recovery of 1.073 Kg of opium from a Swift Dzire car and three persons including the petitioner were arrested on spot.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80523 of 2025(2) dt.02-12-2025 2/3 the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of the opium. It is further submitted that the petitioner is neither owner nor driver of that car, but it is alleged that the petitioner was driver of that car and the same is false allegation. 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 05.06.2025 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, the recovered contraband being below the 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 after framing of charge, if not already framed on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Dhaka P.S. Case No. 280 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80523 of 2025(2) dt.02-12-2025 3/3 (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T