Patna High Court
Tabrej AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail cannot be granted as the seized contraband exceeds commercial quantity and Section 37 of the NDPS Act imposes a bar to bail.
Summary
Petitioner Tabrej Alam was arrested in connection with a case under the NDPS Act for alleged possession of 1.664 kg of charas, which exceeds the commercial quantity. He applied for bail, claiming innocence, lack of prior criminal record, and that no chargesheet or forensic report had been filed even after 180 days. The State opposed bail, invoking Section 37 of the NDPS Act which bars bail when the seized narcotic exceeds commercial quantity. The court examined the facts, the statutory bar, and the absence of a chargesheet, and concluded that the statutory provision overrides the delay argument. Consequently, the court denied the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted when the quantity of narcotic seized exceeds the commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
- Whether the failure to file a chargesheet or forensic report within 180 days bars the grant of bail.
- Whether Section 37 of the NDPS Act creates an absolute bar to bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c), 29, 37
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- charas
- delay in chargesheet
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73317 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2025 Thana- KANGLI District- West Champaran
======================================================
Tabrej Alam S/o Raja Husain Hawari @ Raja Hussain Hawari @ Raja Hushan
R/o Village- Khilichiya, P.S.- Raxaul, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pratik, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 02-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in Kangli P.S. Case No. 22
of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c),
23(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that total 1.664
Kg. of Charas has been recovered in this case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2025 and
has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of
tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Learned
counsel further submits that neither chargesheet not FSL report
has been submitted in this case after lapse of 180 days.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73317 of 2025(3) dt.02-02-2026
2/2
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 recovered contraband 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)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…