Radhe alias Jitendra Paswan vs State of Bihar — 575/2026

Case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 8(c),21(b),22,29. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 06th March 2026.

Case disposed

Anticipatory Bail - ABP

CNR: BRPA010027362026

Filing Number

2387/2026

Filing Date

06-Feb-2026

Registration No

575/2026

Registration Date

06-Feb-2026

Court

DJ Div. Patna Sadar

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

06-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 24-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 8(c),21(b),22,29

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Radhe alias Jitendra Paswan

    Adv. Kritu Verma

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Bihar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    The court rejected the anticipatory bail application of Radhe @ Jitendra Paswan, who was accused of supplying 29.30 grams of heroin under NDPS Act sections. The court found that the quantity recovered exceeded the "small quantity" threshold, a co-accused had disclosed the petitioner supplied the drug, investigation was ongoing, and the petitioner had a prior criminal record, making it unfit for bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 24-Feb-2026

    Order

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 19-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 16-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 07-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 06-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 575/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the anticipatory bail application of Radhe @ Jitendra Paswan, who was accused of supplying 29.30 grams of heroin under NDPS Act sections. The court found that the quantity recovered exceeded the "small quantity" threshold, a co-accused had disclosed the petitioner supplied the drug, investigation was ongoing, and the petitioner had a prior criminal record, making it unfit for bail at that stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case