Patna High Court
Vakil Ray @ Vikky RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Since the seized narcotic quantity was below the commercial threshold and no embargo under Section 37 applied, the court granted bail to the petitioner subject to conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Vakil Ray was arrested on 15 January 2026 in connection with an NDPS case for possession of 1,042 grams of ganja and cash. He applied for bail, arguing that the quantity seized was below the commercial threshold, so Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not bar bail, and that procedural lapses existed under the BNSS, 2023. The State opposed bail, noting a pending case against the petitioner but acknowledging he was on bail in that matter. The court examined the statutory provisions and found no embargo applicable, and therefore ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and several conditions. The bail order required the petitioner’s cooperation in trial, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic quantity is less than the commercial quantity.
- Whether the absence of an embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act precludes denial of bail.
- Whether procedural non‑compliance under Sections 103 and 105 of the BNSS, 2023 affects the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(B)II(B), 37, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- narcotics
- procedural compliance
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17780 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2026 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Vakil Ray @ Vikky Ray Son of Machhu Ray R/o - Rampur Shyamchand, P.S.
- Raghopur, Dist. - Vaishali, Present R/o - Vaishali, Golambar, P.S. -
Kadamkuan, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 Heard Mr.Ghanshyam Tiwary, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr.Murli Dhar, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
15.01.2026 in connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 16
of 2026, F.I.R. dated 14.01.2026 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 8/20(B)II(B) of N.D.P.S.Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on
14.01.2026 the petitioner Vakil Ray along with co-accused
Sonu Kumar near Bakri Mandi under Bahadurpur were
apprehended by police while purchasing and selling ganja.
Upon search, 685 grams of ganja, Rs. 1,350/- in cash and one
mobile phone were recovered from the petitioner Vakil Ray
and 357 grams of ganja and Rs 2,900/- in cash were recovered
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17780 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/4
from possession of co-accused person, namely, Sonu Kumar,
totaling 1042 grams of ganja and Rs.4,250/-.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that it appears from the FIR that 44 puriya measuring
685 grams of ganja, Rs. 1,350/- in cash and one mobile phone
were recovered from the petitioner Vakil Ray and 357 grams
of ganja and Rs 2,900/- in cash were recovered from
possession of co-accused person, namely, Sonu Kumar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits 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, apart from that, the seizure list
witnesses are police personnel. There is non-compliance of
Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023 and co-accused person,
namely, Sonu Kumar has been granted bail by the learned
court below itself and the petitioner is in custody since
15.01.2026.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand,
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
and submits that the petitioner carries one more case other
than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on
bail in the said case, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17780 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/4
petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, 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 District and
Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, Patna in
connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 16 of 2026, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17780 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
4/4
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
Checking your session…