Patna High Court
Harun Rashid @ Mohammad Harun RasidversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner was held to have a prima facie culpable mental state under the NDPS Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Harun Rashid, was named in an FIR for alleged involvement in the recovery of 26.81 grams of smack under Sections 8(c), 21(b), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act. He claimed that his name and mobile number were supplied by co‑accused persons due to village enmity and that no contraband was found on his person. The State opposed his anticipatory bail, arguing that the co‑accused’s testimony established his role as a supplier and that he could not deny the culpable mental state required under Section 35 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner contended that the quantity was not commercial and that Section 37 should not apply, also questioning the propriety of the search under Section 50. The Court, after considering the submissions, held that the prima facie evidence indicated a culpable mental state and therefore rejected the anticipatory bail application. The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the NDPS Act.
- Whether the petitioner possessed the requisite culpable mental state under Section 35 of the NDPS Act.
- Whether Section 37 of the NDPS Act applies given the quantity of narcotic recovered.
- Whether the search of co‑accused under Section 50 was conducted in accordance with the statute.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(b), 25, 29, 35, 37, 50, 8(c)
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- anticipatory bail
- culpable mental state
- drug trafficking
- section 35
- section 37
- section 50
- village politics
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41237 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2026 Thana- NAKARDEI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Harun Rashid @ Mohammad Harun Rasid S/o- Nurain Miyaan @ Nurain
Hussain R/v- Sirisiyawa Mal W.No-2, Ps- Nakardei Po- Noniyadih Dist- East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mohd Rustam Hussain, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Asha Devi, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Nakardei P.S. Case
No. 37 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 8(c), 21(b), 25 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.
3. As per FIR, total 26.81 Grams of Smack was
recovered, which the petitioner alleged to supply to the
apprehended co-accused persons.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that petitioner implicated with the present recovery of
psychotropic substance due to bad village politics and,
moreover, nothing was recovered from his conscious
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41237 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
possession. It is submitted that out of village enmity, the name
and mobile number of petitioner was supplied by the
apprehended co-accused persons to the Police. It is also
submitted that the search upon the apprehended co-accused
persons in view of section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, not appears
followed in its true spirit making the implication of this
petitioner also doubtful. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State while opposing the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, submitted that
investigation of this case is still open and this petitioner was
named by apprehended co-accused persons who was arrested
alongwith contraband. It is submitted that this petitioner was the
supplier of contraband and, moreover, the mobile number of this
petitioner was provided by the apprehended co-accused persons.
6. It is further submitted that petitioner nowhere denied
that said mobile number does not belongs to this petitioner and,
therefore, the culpable mental state of petitioner in view of
section 35 of the N.D.P.S. Act, cannot be denied, however, he
fairly conceded that this is not a recovery of commercial
quantity and, therefore, rigours of section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act
not appears applicable in the present case.
7. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41237 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
taking note of the fact as prima facie the aforesaid submission
suggest the culpable mental state of this petitioner qua recovery
of contraband, accordingly, prayer of anticipatory bail of this
petitioner stands rejected.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.