Patna High Court
Masoom Raja @ Md Rashid AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Since the petitioner has no direct possession of the contraband, a clean antecedent, and the quantity seized is below commercial threshold, the embargo under Section 37 does not apply and bail is warranted.
Summary
Masoom Raja, arrested on 14‑12‑2025 in connection with a case under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act, sought bail. The seized contraband of 105.24 g of brown sugar/smack was recovered from co‑accused persons, not from the petitioner’s conscious possession, and the petitioner’s name was mentioned only in the co‑accused’s confessional statements. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the quantity was below commercial threshold, so Section 37’s embargo on bail should not apply. The State opposed bail. The Court, noting the lack of direct possession, the petitioner’s clean record and the small quantity, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions for cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under the NDPS Act when the seized quantity is below commercial threshold and there is no direct possession.
- Whether the statutory embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applies in the present case.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(b), 37, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- drug trafficking
- confessional statement
- co‑accused
- embargo
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15054 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-496 Year-2025 Thana- BAISI District- Purnia
======================================================
Masoom Raja @ Md Rashid Alam Son of Salim Shekh @ Rojid Alam
Resident Of Village- Geruaa, Ps- Amour, Dist- Purnia
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pawan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 Heard Mr.Pawan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr.Binod Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
14.12.2025 in connection with Baisi P.S. Case No. 496 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 13.12.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Section 8(c) & 21(b) of N.D.P.S.Act, 1985.
3. Recovery is of 105.24 Gm of Brown Sugar/Smack.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation
as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner
has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. It appears
from the FIR as well as seizure list that altogether 105.24 Gm of
Brown Sugar/Smack was recovered from possession of co-
accused persons, namely, Papai Ghosh and Nawab Ali and they
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15054 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
have disclosed the name of the petitioner that they delivered the
same to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that except the confessional statement of the petitioner,
no other cogent material has come during investigation against
the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the
present occurrence, apart from that, the recovered contraband is
less than the commercial quantity. Hence, there is no embargo
under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S.Act for grant of bail to the
petitioner and the police, after investigation, submitted
chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 14.12.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean
antecedent, nothing has been recovered from conscious
possession of the petitioner rather the recovery has been made
from from possession of co-accused person and on the basis of
the confessional statement of co-accused persons, name of the
petitioner has been transpired, let the petitioner, above named,
be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Principal District and Sessions Judge-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15054 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
cum-Special Judge (NDPS Act), Purnea in connection with
Baisi P.S. Case No. 496 of 2025, with the following conditions:-
(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…