Radhika Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 21 May, 2025

Patna High Court – Orders

Radhika Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 21 May, 2025

Author: Ashok Kumar Pandey

Bench: Ashok Kumar Pandey

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31274 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-441 Year-2023 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Radhika Devi W/o- Devilal Bhagat @ Devilal Prasad Village- Bada Pakad
                 Dulma Ps- Madhuban Dist- East Champaran

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Raki Alam, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   21-05-2025

Heard Mr. Raki Alam, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.

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

registered for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c),

22, 23 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The case of the prosecution is that from the possession

of this petitioner, 4 Kg 613 gram of charas like material was

recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. She has

falsely been implicated in this case. She has got no criminal

antecedent. It is further submitted that the witnesses of seizure

list are not the independent witnesses and from perusal of the

F.I.R., it will also transpire that the weighing scale was not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31274 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025
2/4

proper as it has been obtained from a shop. As per the N.D.P.S.

Rules, the search team has to take with them Narcotic Detection

Kit and weighing scale but from perusal of the F.I.R., it will

transpire that they were not having both the things.

5. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the

petitioner that in this case, the charge-sheet has been filed

without FSL report. From perusal of the case diary, it transpires

that the charge-sheet was filed on 09.03.2024. From perusal of

the record, it transpires that there is a letter of S.P., East

Champaran, Motihari that FSL report is still awaited. It has also

been submitted that the body of the petitioner was searched and

the provisions of Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act were not followed.

It has also been submitted that from perusal of the F.I.R. and

seizure list, it is clear that the contraband which has been

recovered from the possession of this petitioner is not

ascertained as yet as in seizure list and F.I.R., it is mentioned as

object like charas. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody

since 14.09.2023.

6. As far as the argument of the learned counsel

regarding submission of the charge-sheet without FSL report is

concerned, I would like to refer the order of the Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 65898 of 2023, wherein
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31274 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025
3/4

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 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.

7. In the case of Rabi Prakash vs. the State of Odisha,

Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the prolonged

incarceration generally militate against the most precious

fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the

constitution of India and in such situation, the conditional

liberty must override the statutory embargo created under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31274 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025
4/4

Section 37 sub-clause 1(b) of the NDPS Act. The charge sheet

filed without FSL report does not ipso facto creates any

embargo against the fundamental right of a citizen enshrined in

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

8. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the

prayer of regular bail.

9. 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 released on bail in connection with

Chhatauni P.S. Case No. 441 of 2023 corresponding to N.D.P.S.

Case No. 21 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-

(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge-I, Motihari, East

Champaran.

10. Accordingly, the present bail application stands

allowed.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T