Patna High CourtCR. MISC./91189/2025dismissed

Bhaibhav Kumar Mishra @ Bhibhav Kumar @ Bibhav Kumar Mishra v. The Union Of India Through The Assistant Commissioner, Customs (Prev.) Division, Motihari

2026-03-26Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91189 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2013 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- East Champaran ====================================================== Bhaibhav Kumar Mishra @ Bhibhav Kumar @ Bibhav Kumar Mishra S/o Madan Mishra R/o Village - Chapra Bahas, P.S - Sugauli, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union of India through the Assistant Commissioner, Customs (Prev.) Division, Motihari Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. K.N. Singh (A.S.G.) For the Customs :

Mr. Amit Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-03-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Customs.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 30 of 2013 arising out of Special Case No. 18 of 2012-13 registered for the offence under Sections 20, 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, 65 kg of Ganja was recovered from a vehicle of which the petitioner is the registered owner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. Petitioner is in custody since 26.09.2025. He further submits

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91189 of 2025(5) dt.26-03-2026 2/2 that the vehicle was sold to one Kuraish Tiwari in the year 2013 but in the registration certificate, ownership was not got changed.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the customs vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that during the investigation, Kuraish Tiwari has denied this contention of the petitioner.

6. Considering the huge recovery from the vehicle belonging to the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands rejected.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T