Patna High Court
Sudama RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the petitioners, subject to bond and surety conditions, as the seized quantity was below commercial quantity and procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act were not satisfied.
Summary
The petitioners, Ritu Kumar and Sudama Rai, were arrested in connection with a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for alleged possession of 4 kg of ganja, of which 1.75 kg was recovered from a scooty. They contended that they were falsely implicated, that no contraband was found in their conscious possession, and that the quantity seized was below the commercial threshold, rendering Section 37 inapplicable. The petitioners also argued that the prosecution had not complied with the bail provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, and highlighted the lack of prior criminal records for one petitioner and four prior convictions for the other. The State opposed bail, but the Court, noting the sub‑commercial quantity, the duration of custody, and the procedural lapses, decided to grant bail to both petitioners subject to monetary sureties and appearance conditions. The order directed release on bail with a bond of Rs.15,000 and two sureties, and stipulated that failure to appear on two consecutive dates could lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic quantity is below commercial quantity
- Whether the non‑application of Section 37 and non‑compliance with Sections 42 and 50 justify bail
- Whether the petitioners' lack of conscious possession and prior criminal antecedents affect the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(B), 37, 42, 50, 8
Subjects
- NDPS Act
- bail
- drug possession
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- Section 42
- Section 50
- criminal antecedent
- court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79630 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2025 Thana- KHAJEKALA District- Patna
======================================================
Ritu Kumar @ Ritu Raj Ranjan S/O Sri Sunil Rai @ Sri Sunil Kumar R/v-
Tenant in the house of Sudama Rai, Diwan Mohalla (Hamampar) P.S.
-Khajekala, Distt. -Patna Permanent resident of village- Mile Bidupur, P.S.-
Bidupur, Distt.- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 79962 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2025 Thana- KHAJEKALA District- Patna
======================================================
Sudama Rai S/o Sri Jivan Rai R/o Village - Diwan Mohalla (Hamampar), P.S
- Khajekala, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 79630 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 79962 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 06-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
APP for the State and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with
Khajekala P.S. Case No. 322 of 2025, instituted for the offences
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79630 of 2025(4) dt.06-02-2026
2/3
punishable under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.
3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that there is
recovery of total 4 Kg Ganja out of which 1.75 Kg of Ganja has
been recovered from a scooty parked in a garage.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No
incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious
possession of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners
also submits that the petitioners have got no concern with the
alleged recovery of Ganja. The petitioners were not arrested on
spot. Name of the petitioner have transpired in this case in
course of investigation. The recovered contraband is below the
commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is
not applicable in the present case. The petitioner are in custody
since 05.08.2025. The petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 79630 of 2025
has got no criminal antecedent and the petitioner in Cr. Misc.
No. 79962 of 2025 has got four criminal antecedents. There is
no compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is
further submitted that other co-accused has been granted regular
bail by this Court vide order dated 11.12.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 80683 of 2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79630 of 2025(4) dt.06-02-2026
3/3
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, the recovered contraband being below the
commercial quantity and the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. Let the petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 79630 of 2025
be released on bail and the petitioner in Cr. Misc. No. 79962 of
2025 be released on bail after framing of charge, if not already
framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with
Khajekala P.S. Case No. 322 of 2025, subject to the following
conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioners.
(II) The petitioners shall appear on each and every
date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on
two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel
the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…