Patna High Court
Rupesh Kumar Yadav @ Rupesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Since the seized contraband was less than commercial quantity and the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with, there is no embargo under Section 37, warranting the grant of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Rupesh Kumar Yadav, was arrested on 24 November 2025 in connection with a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for alleged possession of 6 kg of ganja. He applied for bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the FIR was fabricated. The State opposed the bail, invoking the seriousness of the offence. The court examined the quantity seized, noting it was below the commercial quantity but above the small quantity, and observed non‑compliance with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, thereby finding no embargo under Section 37. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding trial cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to the Principal Sessions Judge, Madhubani, for implementation.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under the NDPS Act given the quantity of narcotics seized.
- Whether the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, including the embargo under Section 37, are applicable in this case.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)ii(B), 25A, 37, 8(C)
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- bail
- drug possession
- quantity thresholds
- Section 37
- mandatory provisions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5197 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2025 Thana- ANDHRAMATH District- Madhubani
======================================================
Rupesh Kumar Yadav @ Rupesh Yadav Son of Ashok Yadav @ Ashok Kumar
Yadav @ Ashik Yadav Resident of Village- Rajviraj Ward No. 2 (wrongly
mentioned in F.I.R. Ward No.5), P.S.- Rajviraj, District- Saptari (Nepal)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Anil Prasad Singh, learned A.P.P. for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
24.11.2025 in connection with Andhramath P.S. Case No. 181 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 23.11.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 8(C),20(b)ii(B),25A of N.D.P.S.Act.
3. Recovery is of 06 Kgs of Ganja.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation
as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner
has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further
submits that it appears from the FIR that altogether 06 Kgs of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5197 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
Ganja has been recovered from possession of the petitioner.
Further submits that there is non-compliance of the mandatory
provisions of the NDPS Act and the recovered contraband is less
than the commercial quantity but more than the small quantity.
Hence, there is no embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S.Act
for grant of bail to the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 24.11.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, recovered
contraband is less than the commercial quantity and there is
non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Principal
Sessions Judge, Madhubani in connection with Andhramath P.S.
Case No. 181 of 2025, with the following conditions:-
(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5197 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…