SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 2105

PATNA HIGH COURT
Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Kumar Sah
Cr.Misc.-80855/2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80855 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2025 Thana- GHURNA District- Araria

======================================================

Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Kumar Sah Son of Arjun Sah R/o Village-

Devanganj, Ward No. 05, P.S.- Devcanganj, District- Sunsari (Nepal)

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Aggarawal, Sr. Advocate

Mr.Aditya Raj, Advocate

Mr. Kumar Raj Deep, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

ORAL ORDER

4 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

registered for the offence punishable under section 317 (5) of

the BNS, 2023 and sections 8/20 (b) (ii) (c) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the police

received information that certain persons are carrying

contraband in two four wheeler vehicles. The driver of the dark

gray colour scorpio managed to escape. Two persons were

found in the white scorpio; one of them was sitting in the

driver’s seat and was identified as Tarun Kumar Yadav and the

other was Shivam Kumar. From the white colour scorpio

vehicle 24 K.G and 12 KG of ‘ganja’ like substance were

##PAGE2##

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80855 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026

2/4

recovered and from the Grey Colour scorpio vehicle, 24 K.G.

and 14.500 K.G, totalling 74.500 K.G. of ‘ganja’ like substance

were recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It is further

submitted that a bare perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the

petitioner was sitting on the side seat of the driver. It is further

submitted that the petitioner is neither the driver nor the owner

of the vehicle, in question and that nothing has been recovered

from the conscious possession of this petitioner. It is also

evident from the FIR that the raiding was also not having a kit

to verify as to whether the seized material was ‘ganja’ or not,

i.e. why it has been written described in the FIR as ‘ganja’ like

substances. It is further submitted that from a perusal of charge

sheet, it is clear that the same was filed prior to the receipt of

FSL report.

5. From perusal of the record of this case, it appears

that Investigating Officer (I.O.) submitted charge sheet on

17.08.2025 and thereafter, continued with supplementary

investigation. A perusal of the FSL report shows that the same

was signed in the laboratory on 14.10.2025 much after the filing

of the charge sheet.

##PAGE3##

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80855 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026

3/4

6. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner

has relied an order of co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in

Cr. Misc. No. 65898 of 2023, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench

has opined that from reading of Section 36(a) sub-clause 4 of

the NDPS Act, it appears that in the case of offence punishable

under Section 19 or Section 24 or Section 27(a) or for offences

involving commercial quantity, the charge-sheet can be

submitted within 180 days and if the charge-sheet is not

submitted within 180 days, the accused person is entitled for

default bail. The proviso to Section 37(a) speaks that public

prosecutor may take an extension of time for filing the charge-

sheet and 180 days time can be extended for a period up to one

year. After the public prosecutor files that progress report of the

investigation and gives specific reasons for detention of the

accused beyond the said period of 180 days.

7. It is further submitted that under the provision of

law, investigation of the case is required to be completed within

a period of six months which may be extended for every six

months on the prayer of Special Public Prosecutor, however, no

such extension was sought or granted in th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top