Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ashok KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Since the seized narcotic quantity is below commercial quantity and the statutory conditions for denial of bail under Sections 50 and 37 of the NDPS Act are not satisfied, the petitioner is entitled to bail.

Summary

Ashok Kumar was arrested on 31 January 2026 in connection with an FIR alleging possession of 11 grams of 'smack' under Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of the NDPS Act. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the seized quantity (11 grams) was below the commercial quantity, and that the prosecution had not complied with Section 50 of the NDPS Act nor Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023. The State opposed bail, but the court noted the lack of statutory embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Considering the low quantity, clean record, and procedural lapses, the court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions. The bail order was directed to be implemented without delay for verification of antecedents.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite alleged possession of narcotic substance under the NDPS Act
  • Whether the quantity seized attracts the statutory embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act
  • Whether non‑compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 103 of the BNSS, 2023 bars the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • narcotic possession
  • commercial quantity
  • Section 50 NDPS
  • Section 103 BNSS
  • clean antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20487 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2026 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Ashok Kumar Son of Naresh Prasad R/o South Panchayat Simariya Bind Toli,
                 P.S.- Chakiya, Dist.- Begusarai, A/p near Patliputra Station, P.S.- Rupaspur,
                 Dist.- Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Ram Jiban Pd Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   26-03-2026                    Heard Mr.Ram Jiban Pd Singh, learned counsel

                   for the petitioner and              Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody

                   since 31.01.2026 in connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case

                   No. 61 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 30.01.2026 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 8(c)/21(b) of NDPS Act.

                                3. Allegation against the petitioner is that 30

                   sachet smack weighing 11 Grams of smack has been

                   recovered from possession of petitioner Ashok Kumar and

                   36 sachet smack weighing 13 Grams of smack has been

                   recovered from possession of co-accused person, namely,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20487 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                            2/4




          Ajay Kumar respectively, totaling 24 Grams.

                       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. He further submits that it appears from the FIR as

          well as seizure list that 11 Grams of Smack like substance

          has been recovered from possession of petitioner Ashok

          Kumar and 13 Grams of Smack like substance has been

          recovered from possession of co-accused person, namely,

          Ajay Kumar respectively, totaling 24 Grams. Learned

          counsel for the petitioner submits that there is non-

          compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and there is also

          non-compliance of Section 103 of BNSS,2023 and 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

          petitioner is in custody since 31.01.2026.

                       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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20487 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                            3/4




          clean antecedent, the recovered contraband is less than the

          commercial quantity and                  there is non-compliance of

          Section 50 of the NDPS Act and Section 103 of

          BNSS,2023, 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 Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS), Patna in

          connection with Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 61 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
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20487 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
                                                           4/4




                         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


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.