← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./80496/2025dismissed

Niraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-25Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80496 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-304 Year-2024 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Niraj Kumar S/O Late Sitaram Rai R/O Goriyara, P.O- Mansurpur Chamruwa, P.S- Panapupr, (Kanti) O.P., Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Mohd Rustam Hussain, Advocate For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No.304 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act. 3.

Earlier, the bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 14.05.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.22859 of 2025. The aforesaid order dated 14.05.2025 reads as under:- "Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner, who is in custody since 25.08.2024, seeks regular bail in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 304 of 2024 registered for the offence

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80496 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026 2/2 under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, 120 Kg of ganja was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

4. Considering the huge recovery of ganja from the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected.."

4.

Considering the quantum of recovery of ganja, which is alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner and also the fact that the charge has been framed in the case, I am not inclined to review my earlier order dated 14.05.2025. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) pawan/- U T