Patna High Court
Rakesh GautamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted as there was no reason to believe the petitioner was not guilty nor that he would not commit a similar offence if released.
Summary
Rakesh Gautam was arrested on 12 October 2025 in connection with a case alleging possession of 318.58 grams of smack, contravening Section 111 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and several sections of the NDPS Act, 1985. He filed a bail petition claiming the FIR was fabricated and that the narcotics were recovered from a scooty he did not own. The State opposed bail, highlighting the commercial quantity of the narcotics and the petitioner’s six other pending cases. The court examined the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and relevant Supreme Court precedents, concluding that the recovery of a large quantity indicated probable knowledge and a risk of re‑offending. Consequently, the court refused bail, finding no sufficient reason to believe the petitioner was innocent or would not commit a similar offence if released.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act when a commercial quantity of narcotics has been recovered.
- Whether the petitioner had knowledge and control over the seized narcotics.
- Whether the FIR is false and the petitioner is not the owner of the vehicle from which the narcotics were recovered.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 111
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 18(c), 21(c), 22(c), 29, 37, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- narcotics
- Section 37
- presumption of guilt
- fabricated FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4631 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2025 Thana- Ratanpur District- Begusarai
======================================================
Rakesh Gautam S/o Ravindra Singh R/o vill- Ratanpur, Ward No 21, P.S-
Ratanpur, Dist- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 18-04-2026 Heard Mr.Anuj Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Ajay Kumar No. 2, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
12.10.2025 in connection with Ratanpur P.S. Case No. 86 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 12.10.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Section 111 of BNS, 2023 and Sections
8(c),21(c),22(c),18(c),29 of N.D.P.S.Act.
3. Recovery is of 318.58 Gms of Smack.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
Further submits that it appears from the FIR that nothing has
been recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4631 of 2026(5) dt.18-04-2026
2/3
rather the recovery has been made from the Scooty in question
and petitioner is not the owner of the Scooty in question.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on
the basis of the material available on the record and the case
diary, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that altogether 318.58 Gms of Smack was
recovered and the recovered contraband is more than the
commercial quantity, apart from that, the petitioner carries six
more cases other than the present one, as mentioned in para-3 of
the bail petition.
6. The grant of bail in NDPS cases where the recovery
of commercial quantity of narcotic is alleged is circumscribed
under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985,
Section 37 which says that before grant of bail, the Court must
have reason to believe that the petitioner has not committed the
offence and in the event of release he would not commit similar
offence.
7. The issue was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of State of Kerala and Ors Vs. Rajesh &
Ors, reported in 2020(12) SCC 122 as well as in the case of
Narcotic Control Bureau Vs.Mohit Aggarwal reported in
AIR 2022 SC 3444 and recently decided the judgment in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4631 of 2026(5) dt.18-04-2026
3/3
case of Union of India Vs. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu,
reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 346.
8. The recovery of huge quantity of Smack from
possession of the petitioner would not justify that the petitioner
had no knowledge of the narcotic nor there is any material to
substantiate that the petitioner would not commit such offence
in the event of release.
9. Hence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner
on bail in connection with Ratanpur P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025,
pending in the court of learned Principal Sessions Judge,
Begusarai.
10. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…