Mahabir Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82850 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2024 Thana- PIRO District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Mahabir Paswan S/o Late Dasai Paswan @ Dasai Ram Resident of VillageBelaur, P.S.- Udwant Nagar, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Piro (Hasan Bazar) P.S. Case No. 229 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 20(B)(ii)(c) and 29 NDPS Act.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, there is recovery of 40.38 Kg ganja from the possession of the petitioner along with other co-accused persons.

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 the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82850 of 2025(2) dt.28-11-2025 2/2 the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has got no concern with the alleged recovery of ganja. The petitioner is in custody since 09.06.2024 and has got no criminal antecedent. There is no compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the NPDS Act.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is also submitted that recovered contraband is above the commercial quantity, and the petitioner being party to the criminal conspiracy, as also there is bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is further submitted that the FSL report corroborates with the prosecution case. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail. Bail of other co-accused has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.08.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 62287 of 2025.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial expeditiously.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T