Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Ajay YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court held that bail should be granted as the contraband recovered was below commercial quantity and the petitioner had no incriminating material nor prior record.

Summary

Ajay Kumar Yadav was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act after 12.6 kg of ganja was recovered from a co-accused. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, asserting that no narcotic material was found in his possession, the quantity seized was below commercial quantity, and he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, while the petitioner argued that Sections 37, 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were not applicable. The Court considered the low quantity of the seized contraband and the petitioner’s clean antecedents, and decided to grant bail. Bail was ordered on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted to an accused under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic quantity is below commercial quantity
  • Whether the provisions of Sections 37, 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act are attracted in the present case

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • commercial quantity
  • Section 37
  • Section 42
  • Section 50
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13670 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2024 Thana- FULKAHA District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Ajay Yadav S/O Babunand Yadav @ Babunandan
                 Yadav @ Babunnd Yadav R/O Village- Laxmipur, Ward No.11, P.S- Fulkaha,
                 Distt.- Araria.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Anil Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

                   for the State and perused the case diary.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Fulkaha

                   P.S. Case No. 212 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.

                               3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that there is

                   recovery of 12.6 Kg of Ganja from the possession of the co-

                   accused Raj Kumar Paswan.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

                   present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No

                   incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious

                   possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been made
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13670 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                     from the co-accused Raj Kumar Paswan. Learned counsel for

                     the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has got no

                     concern with the alleged recovery of Ganja. The recovered

                     contraband is below the commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37

                     of the N.D.P.S. Act is not applicable in the present case. The

                     petitioner is in custody since 24.12.2025 and has got no criminal

                     antecedent. 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, the recovered contraband being below the

                     commercial quantity and 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 Fulkaha P.S. Case

                     No. 212 of 2024.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.