Patna High Court

Shashi Bhushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 5 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Bail was denied as the seized narcotics exceeded the commercial quantity, invoking the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Summary

The petitioner, Shashi Bhushan Kumar, was implicated in a case where 720 litres of cough syrup containing codeine and 27 bags of soyabean were recovered from a pick‑up vehicle he owned. He claimed he was unaware of the vehicle’s use in the alleged offence and was not present at the scene. The prosecution argued that the quantity of codeine (approximately 1.44 kg) exceeds the commercial threshold, invoking a bar on bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner contended that the recovered contraband was below commercial quantity and that Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were not complied with. The court examined the statutory provisions and the fact that the seized narcotics surpassed the commercial limit, concluding that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the petition for bail was rejected.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted to the accused under the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic quantity exceeds the commercial threshold
Applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act in the present case
Whether the requirements of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act have been complied with

Legislation cited

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21(c), 22(c), 29, 35, 37, 42, 50, 8(c)

Subjects

NDPS Act
Bail
Commercial quantity
Drug trafficking
Section 37
Codeine

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55720 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-277 Year-2024 Thana- SIMRI District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Shashi Bhushan Kumar S/O Ramugrah Ray Village- Govindpur Jhakharaha,
                 P.S.- Rajapakar, Dist.- Vaishali.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   05-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

                   Simri Bazar P.S. Case No. 277 of 2024 registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 22(c), 29 and 35

                   of the NDPS Act.

                                3. The prosecution case, in short, is that there is

                   recovery of total 720 litres cough syrup and 27 bags of

                   soyabean, each containing 20 Kg, from pick-up vehicle.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

                   present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted

                   that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55720 of 2025(3) dt.05-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       Name of the petitioner has transpired in this case as being owner

                       of the alleged pick-up vehicle in question. It is next submitted

                       that the petitioner was completely unaware of the misusing the

                       vehicle by the seller in such illegal activity. The petitioner has

                       got one criminal antecedent. The recovered contraband is below

                       the commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37 of the NDPS Act is

                       not applicable in the present case. There is no compliance of

                       Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act.

                                    5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                       opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned

                       A.P.P. submits that total constituents of codeine in 720 litres of

                       cough syrup comes to about 1.440 Kg, which is above the

                       commercial quantity hence, there is bar under Section 37 of the

                       N.D.P.S. Act.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                       of the case and recovery of contraband beyond commercial

                       quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S.

                       Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                                    7. The prayer is rejected.



                                                                   (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…