Patna High Court – Orders
Afroj Mansuri vs The State Of Bihar on 10 March, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5059 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2025 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan
======================================================
Afroj Mansuri Son of Saheb Hussain @ Sahib Husain R/o Village- Jagatpur
Bangra, P.S.- Lakdinaviganj, District- Siwan, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nityanand Mishra, Advocate
Mr.Sachin Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Meena Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-03-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Pachrukhi P.S. Case No. 397 of 2025, instituted for the offences
under Sections 317(5), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, u/s
25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and u/s 8, 20(B)IIB and
29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that 1.7 kg of Ganja,
one country made pistol, one live cartridge and 2.5 litres of
liquor has been recovered from the Scorpio. The petitioner was
arrested on the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5059 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Petitioner is in
custody since 30.08.2025 and has two criminal antecedents.
There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against
the petitioner. No incriminating material has been recovered
from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel
further submitted that the petitioner was neither owner nor
driver of the vehicle, he has only taken lift in the said vehicle
and he has no knowledge regarding the nature of goods loaded
on the vehicle. The recovered contraband is below commercial
quantity, and hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is not
applicable in the present case. There is no compliance of
Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, recovered contraband being just above the small
quantity as also the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Pachrukhi P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5059 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
No. 397 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or
close member.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
