Santosh Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91363 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2025 Thana- BHANGHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Santosh Sah S/o Bhola Sah @ Bholi Sah Resident of Village- Pipra Tola, Ward No. 09, P.S.- Bhangaha, District- West Champaran, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mayank Mohan, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Bhangaha P.S. Case No. 26 of 2025 dated 27.02.2025 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c), 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that total 20.79 Kg. of ganja was recovered from the petitioner and total 21.78 Kg. of ganja was recovered from the co-accused.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated and no such recovery as alleged has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is a labourer and a fake seizure list has been prepared by the police and it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91363 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 has been shown that the substance which is not commercial quantity was recovered from the petitioner. However, the petitioner is a poor person can not afford purchasing such quantity of ganja. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 27.02.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the recovered quantity is more than the commercial quantity and therefore, the petitioner should not be released on bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the recovered quantity of ganja from the conscious possession of the petitioner falls under the category of commercial quantity, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail.

7. The petitioner is at liberty to move for bail as and when advised.

8. The application stands dismissed.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Gautam/- U T