Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Mohammad Harun @ HarunversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED
Bench
ANSUL

Holding

Bail was denied as the court was not inclined to grant bail in view of the commercial quantity of narcotics and the prohibition under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Summary

The petitioner, Mohammad Harun, was arrested in Jogbani, Araria, after 34 kg of ganja was recovered from his house. He filed a bail application before the Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge under the NDPS Act. The High Court examined whether bail could be granted given the commercial quantity of narcotics and the prohibition under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The court held that the presence of a commercial quantity warranted denial of bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence. Consequently, the bail plea was rejected, though the petitioner was permitted to reapply after three months if the trial remained pending. The court clarified that its observations were prima facie and limited to the bail application, without prejudice to the merits of the trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted when a commercial quantity of narcotics is recovered from the accused's premises under Section 37 of the NDPS Act
  • Whether the prohibition under Section 37 justifies denial of bail irrespective of the stage of trial

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • commercial quantity
  • Section 37
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30121 of 2026
                        Arising out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2024 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Mohammad Harun @ Harun S/o Md. Abdul Rajjak Resident of village -
                 Kushmaha, Ward no.- 4, P.S. -Jogbani, District- Araria
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Raj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Rabindra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-05-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in Jogbani P.S. Case No.

                   160 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act, pending before the Ld.

                   Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge NDPS Act, Araria.

                               3. The allegation is that 34 kgs of Ganja was recovered

                   from the house of the petitioner.

                               4. Considering that commercial quantity of contraband

                   was recovered from the house of the petitioner and prohibition

                   is there under Section 37 of NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined

                   to grant bail to the petitioner.

                                5. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the

                   petitioner is rejected.

                                6. However, the petitioner may renew his
                           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30121 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
                                      2/2




           prayer for bail after three months if the trial is not

           concluded.

                     7. It is made clear that any observation made

           herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for

           the purpose of       adjudication of            the     present      bail

           application. Such observations shall not be construed

           as an expression on the merits of the case and shall not

           influence the trial or any other proceedings in any

           manner.



                                      (Ansul, J)
Vikash/-

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.