Patna High Court
Bittu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted as the recovery of a commercial quantity of ganja from the vehicle indicated probable involvement and risk of reoffending, leading to the refusal of the bail petition.
Summary
Bittu Kumar was arrested on 25 July 2025 in connection with a case involving the recovery of 75 kg of ganja from a vehicle he was driving. He sought bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the FIR was fabricated, asserting he had no possession or knowledge of the narcotics. The State opposed bail, citing the commercial quantity of the drug and invoking Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which restricts bail in such cases. The court referred to Supreme Court precedents emphasizing the need for a belief that the accused is not involved and would not reoffend if released. Considering the large quantity recovered and the lack of evidence exonerating the petitioner, the court refused bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act when a commercial quantity of narcotic is recovered from a vehicle driven by the accused.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of no knowledge or possession of the narcotics is sufficient to overcome the presumption of involvement.
- Whether the FIR allegations can be deemed false or fabricated to the extent of denying bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 111(2), 111(3), 20(b)(II), 25, 37
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- narcotics
- presumption of guilt
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24145 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2025 Thana- ASARGANJ District- Munger
======================================================
Bittu Kumar S/O Damodar Ram R/O Village- Bind Toli, P.S- Sahebpur
Kamal, Distt.- Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Union of India thrugh Junior Intelligence officer, Narcotics Control
Bureau, Patna Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel
for the petitioner and learned Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, A.P.P. for
the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
25.07.2025, in connection with Asarganj P.S. Case No. 108 of
2025, FIR dated 24.07.2025 registered for the offence under
Sections 111(2), 111(3) and 20(b)(II), 25 of the NDPS Act.
3. Recovery is of 75 kg of Ganja.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24145 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
any offence as alleged in the FIR. It appears from the FIR that
nothing has been recovered from conscious possession of the
petitioner rather the recovery has been made from the vehicle in
question.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on
the basis of the material available on the record, has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that
altogether 75 kg of Ganja has been recovered from the vehicle
in question which was driven by the petitioner and it appears
from the FIR that huge quantity of Ganja was recovered so there
is embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act to grant privilege
of bail to the petitioner.
6. The grant of bail in NDPS cases where the
recovery of commercial quantity of narcotic is alleged is
circumscribed under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985, Section 37 which says that before grant
of bail, the Court must have reason to believe that the 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 & Ors, reported in 2020(12) SCC 122 as well as in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24145 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
case of Narcotic Control Bureau Vs. Mohit Aggarwal
reported in AIR 2022 SC 3444 and recently decided the
judgment in the case of Union of India Vs. Ajay Kumar Singh
@ Pappu, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 346.
8. The recovery of huge quantity of Ganja from
from the vehicle in question which was driven by the petitioner
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. Considering the aforesaid facts and nature of
allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in connection with Asarganj P.S. Case No. 108
of 2025, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge,
Munger.
10. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.