Patna High Court
Jay Prakash Chaudhari @ Jay Prakash ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, directing him to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Summary
Jay Prakash Chaudhari was arrested after DRI officers, acting on secret information, intercepted him on a train and seized a black trolley bag containing about 14 kg of a substance described as 'believed to be ganja'. The petitioner contended that the bag did not belong to him, that the substance had not been conclusively identified as ganja, and that the quantity was less than a commercial amount, while also noting his lack of prior criminal record. The State and DRI opposed his bail, arguing the seriousness of the alleged offence under the NDPS Act. The Court examined the doubts raised about ownership and the nature of the seized substance, as well as the quantity involved. Concluding that the circumstances did not warrant continued detention, the Court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in an NDPS case where the alleged quantity of narcotic is 14 kg and the ownership of the seized bag is disputed.
- Whether the belief of the DRI that the seized substance is ganja, without conclusive forensic confirmation, suffices to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20, 27, 27A, 29, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- drug trafficking
- possession
- quantity
- DRI
- evidentiary doubt
- commercial quantity
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59241 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-196 Year-2024 Thana- D.R.I District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Jay Prakash Chaudhari @ Jay Prakash Chaudhary S/O Shree Ruplal
Chaudhari Resident of Village- Dariya Chhapra, P.S.- Motipur, District-
Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Director of Revenue Intelligence, Government of India
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Rajpati, Adv.
Mrs. Durga Kumari, Adv.
Mrs. Parishmita Bora, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
For the D.R.I. : Mr. Amrit Pandey, Sr. SC, DRI
Mr. Ankit Kr. Singh, Jr. SC, DRI
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned
counsel for the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with
D.R.I. Case No. 07 of 2024-25 (NDPS Case No. 196 of 2024)
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 20, 27
& 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act and the cognizance has been taken under
Sections 20, 27A and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short is that upon
secret information regarding the transportation of Ganja, the
officers of DRI, Regional Unit, Muzaffarpur, intercepted a person
sitting on berth no. 41 of sleeper coach no. S-8 of Train No. 22643
on 03.10.2024 at 06:00 PM at Mokama station, before two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59241 of 2025(6) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
panches. The intercepted person disclosed himself as Jay Prakash
Chaudhari (the petitioner), aged about 27 years. In the preliminary
inquiry of smuggling of ganja, the petitioner denied it and said
that his black-colored Aristocrat clothes and trolley bag is full
with his clothes, but the officer told him that they have specific
information regarding transportation of ganja in his black-colored
Aristocrat trolley bag. It is further alleged that in a detailed
examination of the said trolley bag, conducted at the DRI office in
Muzaffarpur before the above-named accused persons and two
independent witnesses, panches when the trolley bag was opened,
and the substance found inside the bag containing the substance
believed to be ganja, were recovered from the said trolley bag. It
is alleged that altogether 14 kg and odd of ganja was recovered
from the said trolley bag.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also
submits that the trolley bag, which was searched, does not belong
to the petitioner. He also submits that from perusal of the
forwarding memo of the DRI, it is clear that even the DRI was not
confirmed whether the substance was ganja, as they have used the
word "substance believed to be ganja." He also submits that DRI
has also filed a counter, but even in their counter, they have not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59241 of 2025(6) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
whispered a single word as to what the result in the FSL
examination was. So it is only the belief of the DRI that the
substance that has been recovered from the said trolley bag is
ganja. He further submits that the alleged substance, even for a
moment considered to be ganja, is also less than a commercial
quantity, though more than a small quantity. Moreover, a
statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner
has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial
custody since 04.10.2024.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and the learned counsel for the DRI.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge-I, (N.D.P.S.), Muzaffarpur in
connection with DRI Case No. 07 of 2024-25 (NDPS Case No.
196 of 2024).
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…