Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sanjay MandalversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The court held that the petitioner’s anticipatory bail cannot be granted as the recovery of narcotics from his motorcycle establishes a culpable mental state under Section 35, and the quantity does not exempt him under Section 37.

Summary

The petitioner, Sanjay Mandal, was not named in the FIR but his motorcycle was used by co‑accused to transport 9 kg of ganja, which was seized. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that he had merely handed over the bike, was not in possession at the time of seizure, and that the quantity was below the 20 kg threshold for the presumption of commercial quantity under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The State contended that as the owner of the vehicle, the petitioner possessed the requisite culpable mental state under Section 35 of the NDPS Act. The court examined the factual submissions and held that ownership of the motorcycle coupled with the recovery of narcotics from it established a culpable mental state, and the lower quantity did not absolve liability. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail when narcotics were recovered from his motorcycle.
  • Whether Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which presumes a commercial quantity, applies to the 9 kg of ganja recovered.
  • Whether ownership of the vehicle alone suffices to attract culpable mental state under Section 35 of the NDPS Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • NDPS Act
  • Section 35
  • Section 37
  • commercial quantity
  • drug seizure
  • ownership of vehicle
  • culpable mental state

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4537 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2025 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Sanjay Mandal Son of Baldeo Mandal @ Valdev Mandal R/o Village -
                 Sonbarsa @ Ward no. 5, Patelnagar, P.S. - Sonbarsa, Dist.- Sitamarhi.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Navin Kr. Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-03-2026                    Heard the parties.

                                2.The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and

                   apprehending his arrest in connection with Majorganj P.S.

                   Case No. 188 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 8/20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and 317(5) BNS.

                                3. As per FIR, 9 kg of Ganja was recovered from

                   motorcycle bearing registration no. BR30AE0573 which was

                   under ride of co-accused Aashan Mandal and Bal Kishor

                   Mahto.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that co-accused Aashan Mandal is

                   brother-in-law of the petitioner and upon his request, the
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4537 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
                                                          2/2




                        petitioner handover his motorcycle to him which was misused

                        by co-accused Aashan Mandal. It is submitted that

                        admittedly the recovery was not made from the possession

                        of this petitioner and as the recovered commercial quantity is

                        less than i.e., 20 kg, therefore, rigors of section 37 of NDPS

                        Act not appears applicable in present case. Petitioner claimed

                        clean antecedent.

                                     5. Learned APP, while opposing the prayer of bail

                        submitted that admittedly petitioner is the owner of the

                        motorcycle from where 9 kg of Ganja was alleged to be

                        recovered and, therefore, primarily he appears under

                        culpable mental state in view of Section 35 of NDPS Act.

                                      6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by

                        taking note of fact as recovery of Ganja appears to be made

                        from the motorcycle of the petitioner, accordingly, the prayer

                        of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioner stands

                        rejected.



                                                                (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Sudha/-

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.