Patna High Court
Jiut KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied as the petitioner was not shown to be innocent nor unlikely to re‑offend.
Summary
Jiut Kumar was arrested on 4 June 2025 in connection with a seizure of 125.797 kg of ganja from a truck in East Champaran. The prosecution alleged that Kumar, identified as a co‑accused, knowingly transported the narcotics, while he claimed he had no knowledge and was falsely implicated. He applied for bail, arguing a clean antecedent and that the contraband was recovered from the vehicle, not from his personal possession. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the commercial quantity of the seizure and the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the court held that the magnitude of the seizure and lack of evidence of innocence precluded bail, and consequently refused the petition.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act in granting bail when the alleged offence involves a commercial quantity of narcotics?
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged lack of knowledge and absence of contraband in his personal possession is sufficient to justify bail?
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(B)(ii)(c), 23(c), 25, 29, 37, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- narcotics
- presumption of guilt
- court refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24336 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-304 Year-2025 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Jiut Kumar Son of Late Patiram Sahni Resident of village- Nayka tola,
Jhakhiya Pipar Ps- Banjariya, Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prashant Raj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
04.06.2025 in connection with Banjariya P.S. Case No. 304 of
2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8,20(B)(ii)(c),
23(c), 25 and 29 of NDPS Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on
02.06.2025 at about 05:30 P.M. during the course of patrolling
duty, informant received a secret information that a truck having
its registration no.MH-46 BF-5034 loaded with Ganja is going
towards Sugauli from Motihari. He had informed said
information to Superior Officer, then the informant along with
police party and Rohan Singh, Circle Office, who was deputed
as Magistrate reached at the N.H.-28 and started checking.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24336 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/4
During that course, a truck having its registration no. MH-46
BF-5034 was seen coming, which was intercepted by the police
party. On interrogation, driver of said truck disclosed his name
as Ruplal Sahani and Khalashi of said truck disclosed his name
as Jiut Kumar (present petitioner). On query, both the
apprehended persons disclosed that there is Ganja kept in the
truck. Thereafter, in presence of witnesses and Magistrate,
search was conducted and on search total 125.797 Kg Ganja in
12 packets were recovered from the cabin of said truck. On
query, co-accused Ruplal Sahani disclosed that Ganja was
provided to him by the mobile number holder of mobile no.
6204470542 and he was only directed by said mobile number
holder to park the said truck at Chhapwa Chowk, Sugauli.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and is innocent and he has
falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further
submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that it appears from the FIR and seizure list that nothing
has been recovered from the conscious possession of the
petitioner and recovery has been made from the vehicle in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24336 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
3/4
question and petitioner has been falsely implicated in the
present case.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that it appears from the FIR as
well as seizure list that altogether 127.797 kgs of ganja was
recovered from the cabin of the truck in question and there is
compliance of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act and
recovered contraband is six times more than the commercial
quantity.
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
Substance Act, 1985, Section 37 which says that before grant of
bail, the Court must have reason to believe that petitioners have
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24336 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
4/4
@ Pappu reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 3456 dated
28.03.2023.
8. The recovery of huge quantity of contraband
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 Banjariya P.S. Case No. 304 of 2025
pending in the Court of learned Court Exclusive Special Court-i,
NDPS, East Champaran, Motihari.
10. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…