Patna High Court
Md. IkbalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court refused bail, holding that the recovery of a commercial quantity of narcotic and the absence of material to show the petitioners' innocence preclude bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Summary
Petitioners Md. Sonu and Md. Ikbal, brothers, were arrested on 26‑06‑2025 in connection with FIR dated 25‑06‑2025 alleging offences under Sections 8(c), 21(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The police recovered 260 g of brown sugar, heroin, cash in Indian and Nepali currency and other articles from their residence. The petitioners, represented by senior counsel N.K. Agrawal, sought bail, claiming clean antecedents (for Sonu) and that they were falsely implicated. The State, through its APPs, opposed bail, emphasizing that the quantity recovered constituted a commercial quantity, invoking Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and that the FSL report confirmed heroin. The Court, referring to Supreme Court precedents, held that the commercial quantity and lack of evidence of innocence precluded bail, and consequently refused the petitioners’ bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in an NDPS case where a commercial quantity of narcotic is recovered.
- Whether the petitioners have demonstrated that they are not guilty and would not commit a similar offence if released.
- Whether the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Section 37, have been complied with to justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21, 29, 37, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- narcotics
- heroin
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78274 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2025 Thana- GALGALIYA District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Md. Sonu S/O Md. Junaid R/O Village- Lakrideepo, Bhatgaon, P.S.- Galgalia,
Dist.- Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 83009 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2025 Thana- GALGALIYA District- Kishanganj
======================================================
Md. Ikbal S/O Md. Junaid R/O Village- Lakrideepo, Bhatgaon, P.S.- Galgalia,
Dist.- Kishanganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 78274 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K.Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
: Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 83009 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K.Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
: Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 29-04-2026 Heard Mr. N.K.Agrawal, learned senior counsel for
the petitioners, Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, the learned A.P.P.
for the State (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 78274 of
2025) and Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, the learned A.P.P. for the
State (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 83009 of 2025).
2. The petitioners seek bail, who are in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78274 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
2/4
26.06.2025 in connection with Galgaliya P.S. Case No. 52 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 25.06.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 8(c),21(c),29 of N.D.P.S. Act.
3. Recovery is of 260 Gms of brown sugar.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits
that petitioner, namely, Md. Sonu has clean antecedent and
petitioner, namely, Md. Ikbal carries one more case other than
the present one of similar nature and he is on bail in the said
case. They have falsely been implicated in the present case.
Further submits that it appears from the FIR that altogether 260
Gms of Brown Sugar was recovered from the house of the
petitioners, apart from the aforesaid, it appears from the FIR
itself that both the petitioners are own brothers which suggests
that the petitioners are involved in the present crime in question.
Further submits that there is non-compliance of the mandatory
provisions of the NDPS Act.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that it appears
from the FIR that altogether 260 Gms of Brown Sugar was
recovered from the house of the petitioners and there is
compliance of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, apart
from the aforesaid, the FSL report also confirms that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78274 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
3/4
recovered contraband is Heroin.
Result of Examination
“Heroin, a diacetyl derivative morphine
was detected in the contents of the paper pudiya
marked A, B,C,D & E as described above in the
FSL Report.
Heroin is an addictive, intoxicating and
narcotics drug.”
6. Learned APP for the State further submits that the
recovered contraband is more than the commercial quantity so
there is embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act to enlarge
the petitioners on bail, apart from aforesaid, 42,190/- of Indian
Currency, 52,740/- of Nepali Currency and other articles were
also recovered from the house of the petitioners.
7. The grant of bail in NDPS cases where the recovery
of commercial quantity of narcotic is alleged is circumscribed
under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985,
Section 37 which says that before grant of bail, the Court must
have reason to believe that the petitioners have not committed
the offence and in the event of release they would not commit
similar offence.
8. The issue was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78274 of 2025(5) dt.29-04-2026
4/4
Court in the case of State of Kerala and Ors Vs. Rajesh &
Ors, reported in 2020(12) SCC 122 as well as in the case of
Narcotic Control Bureau Vs.Mohit Aggarwal reported in
AIR 2022 SC 3444 and recently decided the judgment in the
case of Union of India Vs. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu,
reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 346.
9. The recovery of huge quantity of Brown Sugar
from possession of the petitioners would not justify that the
petitioners had no knowledge of the narcotic nor there is any
material to substantiate that the petitioners would not commit
such offence in the event of release.
10. Hence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners
on bail in connection with Galgaliya P.S. Case No. 52 of 2025,
pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge(NDPS Act), Kishanganj.
11. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…