Patna High Court – Orders
Soni Gupta vs The State Of Bihar on 9 July, 2026
Author: Ashok Kumar Pandey
Bench: Ashok Kumar Pandey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48018 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-975 Year-2025 Thana- MANER District- Patna
======================================================
Soni Gupta Wife of Rakesh Prasad Gupta R/o- Rusulpur, P.O. and P.S.-
Maner, District- Patna, at present R/o C/o- Rakesh Prasad Raaghunathpur,
P.O.- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Raghunathpur, District- Buxar at Present.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 09-07-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the
offence punishable under Section 111(2) (a) of the B.N.S., 2023
and Sections 8(c), 18(b), 21(c), 22(b), 22(c), 30 and 31 of the
N.D.P.S. Act and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act
and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the
house of the grandparents of this petitioner, altogether 140 grams
of smack and 558.90 grams of Charas were recovered.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence. She has been falsely implicated in this case. He also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48018 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
2/3
submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of
the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are police
personnel and the police has not complied with Section 105 of the
BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits that the
petitioner has gone to her grandmother’s house. She is a married
lady, and her matrimonial house is at Buxar. He further submits
that the alleged recovery of the contraband is though more than
small quantity but is much less than commercial quantity. He
further submits that in this case, police have submitted charge-
sheet without the FSL report. Moreover, a statement has been
made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal
antecedent and she is languishing in judicial custody since
28.12.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on an
order of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 84487 of 2024 and in
that order, this court has relied on an order of the learned co-
ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 65898 of
2023 wherein the learned 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48018 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
3/3
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. In the present case,
the Special Public Prosecutor has not filed any application for
extension of period of the charge-sheet and the charge-sheet as per
the contention of the petitioner has been filed without FSL report.
In above facts and circumstances this is a case of default bail.
6. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District &
Sessions Judge, Patna in connection with Maner P.S. Case No.
975 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
