Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Rajesh Kumar @ Pappu Chaudhary @ PappuversusThe Union of India through Junior Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Patna

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner faced a prima facie case under Section 35 NDPS Act and the seized quantity far exceeded the commercial limit, making Section 37 applicable.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajesh Kumar, was named in an FIR for the seizure of 275 kg of ganja from a truck, based on statements of co‑accused drivers. He argued that no contraband was found in his possession, that no preliminary test or proper sealing, search and sampling were conducted, and that the NDPS Act's Section 37 should not apply. The NCB countered that call detail records showed frequent communication between the petitioner and the co‑accused, indicating knowledge and participation under Section 35 of the NDPS Act. The Court examined the prima facie evidence of culpable mental state and the large quantity exceeding commercial limits. Concluding that the criteria for anticipatory bail under Section 37 were met, the Court rejected the petitioner's anticipatory bail and directed that regular bail, if any, be decided by the trial court after surrender.

Issues considered

  • What is the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act to grant anticipatory bail when the accused is not in physical possession of the contraband?
  • Whether the call records establish a culpable mental state under Section 35 of the NDPS Act sufficient to deny anticipatory bail?
  • Whether procedural lapses in sealing, search and sampling affect the grant of anticipatory bail?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • NDPS Act
  • Section 35
  • Section 37
  • drug trafficking
  • seizure
  • call detail records
  • commercial quantity
  • bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4500 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2021 Thana- N.C.B (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL)
                                                    District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Rajesh Kumar @ Pappu Chaudhary @ Pappu, S/o Umanath Chaudhary,
                 Resident of Village-Jale West Shanker Chowk, P.S.- Jale District- Darbhanga

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner
                                                 Versus
                 The Union of India through Junior Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control
                 Bureau, Patna

                                                          ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :      Mr. Shankar Kumar, Advocate
                 For the U.O.I./N.C.B.   :      Mr. Ram Tujabh Singh, CGC
                                                Mr. Radhika Raman Singh, AC to CGC
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-02-2026                 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Central Government Counsel appearing for the Union of

                   India/NCB.

                               2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and

                   apprehending his arrest in connection with C-2 Case No.3 of

                   2021 arising out of NCB Case No.34 of 2021 registered under

                   Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs

                   and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short ‘N.D.P.S.

                   Act’)

                               3. As per FIR, total 275 kg. of ganja in 20 packets

                   was recovered from the truck bearing Engine No.BRJ 15177.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4500 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
                                            2/4




                       4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for

          petitioner that the name of petitioner transpired on the basis

          of disclosure made by apprehended co-accused persons

          namely, Prem Kumar and Rajesh Mahto, who are the driver

          and co-driver of the truck in issue from where the contraband

          was seized. It is submitted that in view of same, it is an

          admitted position that no contraband as alleged was

          recovered from physical possession of this petitioner and,

          therefore, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act appears

          not applicable in present case.

                       5.     Arguing further, it is submitted that even no

          preliminary test was conducted in this matter and merely on

          the basis of suspicion, as the seized material was “ganja like

          substance”, the entire implication was raised. It is submitted

          that still in this matter, the FSL report is awaited. In this

          context, it is further submitted that even compliance of golden

          principles qua Sealing, Search and Sampling (SSS) also not

          appears followed in its true spirit as provisioned under

          N.D.P.S. Act in present case. Explaining criminal antecedent,

          it is submitted that petitioner found involved in one more
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4500 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
                                            3/4




          criminal case, which is of Excise, where he is on bail.

                       6.     Learned counsel appearing for NCB/Union of

          India while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that from

          perusal of the impugned order, it can be gathered safely that

          the apprehended co-accused Prem Kumar and Rajesh Mahto

          have already convicted by the learned Trial Court and this

          petitioner soon before recovery was in regular touch over

          phone with three co-accused persons. It is further pointed out

          that with Prem Kumar this petitioner found in conversation for

          six times. Similarly, with convict Rajesh Mahto, 88 times and

          with co-accused Gagan Baitha 32 times, which categorically

          suggest culpable mental state of petitioner in view of Section

          35 of the N.D.P.S. Act and, therefore, rigors of Section 37 of

          the N.D.P.S. Act appears applicable in present case, which

          also put a bar as to entertain the prayer of bail of petitioner.

                       7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

          taking note of fact as the petitioner as per call detail reports

          was talking frequently with co-accused persons like driver and

          co-driver, suggesting prima facie his culpable mental state in

          view of Section 35 of the N.D.P.S. Act and moreover the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4500 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
                                                       4/4




                     recovered quantity is much more than commercial quantity

                     i.e. 275 kg of ganja, accordingly, prayer of anticipatory bail of

                     petitioner stands rejected.

                                  8.     Upon surrender, the learned trial court may

                     decide the prayer of regular bail of petitioner in accordance

                     with law without being prejudiced by any of the observation

                     as made by this Court.


                                                        (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
    Sanjeet/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.