Patna High Court - Orders
Md. Margub Alam vs The State Of Bihar on 3 December, 2025
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78661 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-226 Year-2025 Thana- Madhubani T District- Purnia
======================================================
Md. Margub Alam S/o Md. Sabbir Resident of Village- Parora, P.S.- K.
Nagar, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sushil Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-12-20251. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Madhubani PS Case No. 226 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case under the NDPS Act and the informant alleges that he received secret information that petitioner along with his associates have kept codeine syrup in large quantity in room no.7 of rented lodge of Dinesh near RKK college, accordingly the informant informed his superior officer and got a Magistrate deputed and thereafter reached the place of occurrence and two persons were apprehended who disclosed Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78661 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 2/3 their names as Rahul and Surendra, while two accused fled and 3538 bottles of codeine syrup of 100 ml each along with 66 bottles of liquor was recovered and owner of the lodge Dinesh was also not present.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is next submitted that the persons who are alleged to have fled from the place of occurrence is not the petitioner. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, the petitioner came to be implicated on the ground that the room from where codeine was recovered was rented by the petitioner and he was staying in the same room.
5. The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that petitioner earlier was implicated in a case related to NDPS as such this is the second case under the NDPS Act, it is further submitted that of late in the State of Bihar codeine has become a menace and investigation of the case is in its nascent stages and the informant alleges that he received secret information about the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence.
6. Considering the submission made by learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78661 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 3/3 bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/-
U T