Patna High CourtCR. MISC./78429/2025dismissed

Md. Ramjan v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-16Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78429 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2024 Thana- MAHALGAON District- Araria ====================================================== Md. Ramjan Son of Late Md. Salim @ Md. Alim Resident of Village- Ward no.-5, Lahthaura, P.S.- Araria, District-Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Mahalgaon P.S. Case No. 95 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, there is recovery of 193 Kg of ganja and cash of Rs. 5,19,435/- from the petitioner and other co-accused.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. Petitioner is in custody since 12.09.2024. He further submits that the alleged recovery of ganja has not been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner, therefore, he may be granted bail. He further submits that two co accused have been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78429 of 2025(4) dt.16-02-2026 2/2 granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. I have considered the submissions of the parties. I am not convinced with the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 193 Kg of ganja has been recovered from the accused persons which cannot be kept personally by one of the accused and moreover a huge amount of money has also been recovered.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands rejected.

8. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T