Patna High Court
Raj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that the presence of a commercial quantity of narcotics triggers the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, precluding the grant of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Kumar, applied for bail in a case under Sections 8(c) and 21(c) of the NDPS Act where 256.01 grams of heroin (smack) was allegedly recovered from the handlebar of a motorcycle. The petitioner claimed innocence, no prior criminal record, and argued that the contraband was not in his conscious possession and that he was not the owner of the vehicle. The State opposed bail, contending that the quantity exceeded the commercial threshold, invoking the bar on bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The court examined the facts, noted the recovery of a commercial quantity of narcotics and the statutory embargo, and found no ground to relax the bail restriction. Consequently, the court rejected the bail petition.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic quantity exceeds the commercial limit and Section 37 imposes a bar
- Whether the procedural requirements of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have been complied with in the present case
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(c), 37, 42, 50, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- drug trafficking
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2480 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-159 Year-2025 Thana- Piplawa District- Patna
======================================================
Raj Kumar Son of Sanjay Paswan Resident of Village- Taregna Dih, P.S.-
Masaurhi, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Piplawan P.S. Case No. 159 of 2025 instituted for the offences
under Sections 8(c), 21(c) of the NDPS Act.
3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that total 256.01
grams of smack has been recovered in this case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The petitioner is in custody since 11.10.2025 and
has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of
tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Learned
counsel further submits that as per the FIR, the recovery of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2480 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
2/2
smack like substance has been made from the handle bar of the
motorcycle. He further contended that petitioner is not the
owner of the motorcycle in question. He further submitted that
nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of
the petitioner. There is no compliance of Section 42 and 50 of
the N.D.P.S. Act.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned
A.P.P. submits that recovered contraband is above the
commercial quantity, hence, there is bar under Section 37 of the
N.D.P.S. Act.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and recovery of contraband beyond commercial
quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S.
Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…