Patna High Court
Vivek KumarversusThe Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied as the petitioner was deemed likely to have committed the offence and could re‑offend if released.
Summary
Vivek Kumar was arrested on 12 February 2025 in connection with an NCB raid that recovered 1,900 kg of ganja, and charged under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 25, 27A and 29 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner pleaded for bail, claiming a clean antecedent, that the FIR was fabricated, and that he was not the owner of the premises where the drugs were seized, although his statement under Section 67 recorded a confession. The NCB opposed bail, emphasizing the commercial quantity of the narcotic, laboratory confirmation of the substance, and the embargo provision under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The court examined the Supreme Court precedents on bail in NDPS cases involving large quantities and held that the seriousness of the offence and risk of re‑offending precluded bail. Consequently, the court refused the bail prayer, denying the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in an NDPS case where a commercial quantity of narcotic has been recovered under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(C), 25, 27A, 29, 37, 67, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act
- Narcotics Control Bureau
- drug trafficking
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15248 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2025 Thana- N.C.B (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL)
District- Patna
======================================================
Vivek Kumar S/o- Satendra Kumar Jha @ Satyendra Kumar Jha Resident of
Sarvoday Nagar Ward No- 40 PS- Town District-Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India through Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Union of India (NCB) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 11-03-2026 Heard Mr. Shashank Shekhar, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned CGC for the
Union of India (NCB).
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
12.02.2025 in connection with N.C.B. (Government Official)
Case No. 01 of 2025, corresponding to NDPS Case No. 16 of
2025 (CNR No. BRSU010068882025) for the offences
punishable under Sections 8 (c)/ 20(b)(ii)(C )/25/27A/29 of the
N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The case relates to recovery of 1900 Kgs. of
Ganja.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15248 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
2/4
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
He further submits that the petitioner is not the owner of the
house in question and the recovery has been made from the
house of Ranjeet Mehta. Although the petitioner was present at
the time of raiding and in presence of the petitioner and other
co-accused persons altogether 1900 Kgs. of Ganja was
recovered from the place of occurrence and thereafter the
statement of the petitioner was recorded under Section 67 of the
NDPS Act and petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present
occurrence.
5. Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the
Union of India (NCB), on the other hand, vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is
recovery of huge quantity of contraband which is of commercial
quantity and the petitioner was apprehended along with other
co-accused person and apart from aforesaid, the alleged sample
was sent for testing by Kolkata laboratory and the same was
confirmed that the recovered contraband is Ganja, so there is
embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act .
6. The grant of bail in NDPS cases where the recovery
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15248 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
3/4
of commercial quantity of narcotic is alleged is circumscribed
under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985,
Section 37 which says that before grant of bail, the Court must
have reason to believe that petitioner has not committed the
offence and in the event of release he would not commit similar
offence.
7. The issue was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of State of Kerala and Ors. Vs. Rajesh and
Ors. reported in (2020) 12 SCC, 122 as well as in the case of
Narcotic Control Bureau Vs. Mohit Aggarwal reported in
AIR 2022 SC 3444 and Union of India vs. Ajay Kumar Singh
@ Pappu reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 3456 dated
28.03.2023.
8. The recovery of huge quantity of Ganja recovered
would not justify that the petitioner had no knowledge of the
narcotic nor there is any material to substantiate that the
petitioner would not commit such offence in the event of
release.
9. Hence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner
on bail in connection with N.C.B. (Government Official) Case
No. 01 of 2025, corresponding to NDPS Case No. 16 of 2025
(CNR No. BRSU010068882025), pending in the Court of Sri
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15248 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
4/4
Sunil Kumar III, learned Additional Sessions Judge-V cum Spl.
Judge NDPS, Supaul.
10. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…