Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Chandan Kumar ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to stipulated conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Chandan Kumar Chaudhary, was arrested in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) case after a police raid recovered 4,500 ampules of Leegesic injection containing 2.7 grams of buprenorphine. He claimed he was falsely implicated, that the ampules were intended for medical use, and that the quantity was below the statutory threshold for invoking Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution opposed bail, while the petitioner’s counsel highlighted his clean antecedent. The Court considered the facts, the small quantity involved, and the petitioner’s background, and ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and compliance with specific conditions. The order also directed the trial court to verify the petitioner’s criminal antecedent and stipulated cancellation of bail for non‑compliance.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted in an NDPS case where 2.7 grams of buprenorphine were seized.
  • Whether the quantity involved attracts the stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • NDPS Act
  • buprenorphine
  • quantity
  • Section 37
  • criminal antecedent
  • court conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82435 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-740 Year-2025 Thana- AGAMKUAN District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Chandan Kumar Chaudhary Son of Niranjan Kumar Chaudhary R/o Mohalla
                 - Nandan, P.S. - Dumraon, Dist. - Buxar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   05-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 740 of 2025 dated 07.10.2025

                   registered for the offences under Sections 21, 22(a) of the

                   Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

                                3. As per the prosecution case the informant on secret

                   information intercepted a scooty and apprehended three persons

                   including the petitioner who disclosed that they were working

                   for OLA company. On search, a total of 4500 ampules of

                   Leegesic injection was recovered in which total 2.7 grams of

                   Buprenorhphine was found.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated and the ampules were
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82435 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
                                            2/3




          being delivered to a shop for medical purposes. It has further

          been submitted that the total amount was found to be 2.7 grams

          which is contained in 4500 ampules in all and therefore it

          cannot be said that the petitioner and other accused persons

          were misusing the said ampules. It is next submitted that the

          small quantity under the Act is only one gram and therefore the

          rigors of Section 37 shall not be attracted. Lastly, it is submitted

          that the petitioner has clean antecedent.

                       5. The petitioner is in custody since 07.10.2025.

                       6. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer

          for bail of the petitioner.

                       7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his

          furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge, (NDPS) Patna in

          connection with Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 740 of 2025 subject

          to the following terms and conditions:

                       (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the

          petitioner;

                       (ii) the petitioner will remain present on each and

          every date fixed, if so required by the learned Trial Court;
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82435 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                                   (iii) in case of absence on two consecutive dates or in

                      violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioner

                      will liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned;

                                   (iv) the trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent

                      of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the

                      petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the trial court

                      shall take step for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioner.

                      However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above

                      mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of the same on

                      in the name of verification.

                                   8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made

                      in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.



                                               (Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.