Patna High Court
Guddu kumarversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioners subject to bond and conditions, as the contraband was below commercial quantity and statutory procedural requirements were not met.
Summary
Petitioners Guddu Kumar and Diwakar Kumar were arrested on 16 June 2025 for alleged possession of 16.03 kg of ganja, alleged offences under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. They applied for bail, claiming a clean antecedent, false implication, that the seized quantity was below the commercial threshold, and that the police had filed the charge‑sheet without complying with mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, notably the absence of a forensic laboratory report. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Court examined the facts, noted the non‑compliance with statutory requirements and the sub‑commercial quantity, and held that these factors justified granting bail. Accordingly, the Court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, presence in court, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was subject to cancellation if conditions were breached.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted when the seized narcotic quantity is less than the commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
- Whether non‑compliance with mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, including the lack of a forensic laboratory report, warrants bail.
- Whether a clean criminal antecedent influences the grant of bail in NDPS cases.
- Whether the charge‑sheet filed without a forensic report affects the legality of continued detention.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(B), 37, 42, 50, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotic drugs
- commercial quantity
- forensic report
- charge sheet
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65601 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2025 Thana- KURSAILA District- Katihar
======================================================
1. Guddu kumar S/O Manoj Mandal @ Manoj Kumar Roy R/O-Chharrapatti,
P.S- Tikkapati, Dist-Purnia, Bihar,Pin- 854204
2. Diwakar Kumar S/O Gajadhar Mandal R/O-Chharrapatti, P.S- Tikkapati,
Dist-Purnia, Bihar,Pin- 854204
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vishal Vikram Rana, Advocate
: Ms. Misha Bharti, Advocate
: Mr. Utkarsh Vikram Rana, Advocate
: Mr. Kumar Saurav Dev, Advocate
: Mr. Akash Priye, Advocate
: Mr. Anurag Darshi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-03-2026 Heard Mr. Vishal Vikram Rana, learned counsel for
the petitioners as well as Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seeks bail who are in custody since
16.06.2025 in Kursela P.S. Case No. 115 of 2025 having
N.D.P.S Case No.95 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 15.06.2025 for the
offences punishable under Sections 8 & 20(b)(ii)(B) of the
Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.
3. Recovery is of 16.03 kg of ganja.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioners have clean antecedent and they falsely been
implicated in the present case. From bare perusal of the FIR it
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65601 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
appears that altogether 16.03 kg of ganja in 14 packets were
recovered from the possession of the petitioners. He further
submits that there is non-compliance of the mandatory provision
of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act and it appears that the
recovered contraband is less than the commercial quantity.
Hence, there is no embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S Act
for grant of bail to the petitioners. He next submits that without
the FSL report, the police has submitted the charge sheet against
the petitioners on 12.08.2025 and the cognizance has also been
taken on 25.08.2025 and the petitioners are in custody since
16.06.2025.
5 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that petitioners have clean antecedent and the
recovered contraband is less than the commercial quantity and
police has submitted the charge sheet against the petitioners
without the FSL report, let the petitioners, 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 the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge(N.D.P.S Act), Katihar in connection with Kursela P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65601 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
Case No. 115 of 2025 , subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tamper 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 petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…