Patna High Court
Rohan Kumar @ Rohan ChandrabanshiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied because the contraband exceeded commercial quantity, invoking the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Rohan Kumar, sought bail in a case where police raided his residence and recovered approximately 1.875 kg of heroin-like substance, cash, firearms and ammunition, constituting commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. The prosecution alleged his involvement in narcotics trafficking and illegal arms possession, while the petitioner claimed innocence, asserting he was not present during the seizure and that the contraband did not belong to him. The State opposed bail, invoking Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which bars bail when the seized narcotic quantity exceeds commercial limits. The court examined the statutory bar and the seriousness of the offences, noting the recovered quantity and the presence of arms. Concluding that the statutory embargo applied, the court denied the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted when the seized narcotic quantity exceeds commercial quantity under Section 37 of the NDPS Act
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of innocence and lack of specific overt act is sufficient to overcome the statutory bar on bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 35
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21, 23, 25, 25A, 27(a), 29, 30, 32, 37
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- drug trafficking
- arms possession
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86779 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-898 Year-2024 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
Rohan Kumar @ Rohan Chandrabanshi S/O Late Gopal Chandrabanshi @
Gopal Prasad Chandravanshi Resident of Village- Mubarakganj, Police
Station- Sasaram (Town), District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Sasaram (Town) P.S. Case No. 898 of 2024 instituted for the
offences under Sections 21, 23, 25, 25A, 27(a), 29, 30, 32 of the
N.D.P.S. Act and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.
3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that on the basis
of secret information, a joint police raid was conducted at
Mubarakganj Mohalla, Sasaram, during which heroin-like
contraband weighing about 930 grams, 722 grams and 223
grams (total about 1.875 kg, commercial quantity), along with
cash of ₹1,31,120/-, mobile phones, live cartridges, pistols,
magazines and firearms, were recovered from the possession
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86779 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
and houses of the accused persons, who are alleged to have
acted in connivance in illegal trafficking of narcotic substances
and possession of illegal arms, resulting in registration of the
case under various provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act and the Arms
Act.
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 03.11.2024 and
has got six criminal antecedents. There is no allegation of
tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The
allegation against the petitioner is based on general and omnibus
statements without any specific overt act attributed to him. The
contraband allegedly recovered from his house, including 930
grams of heroin-like substance, cash, cartridges, and mobile
phones does not belong to him. The petitioner was not present at
the time of alleged throwing of packets and recovery of the
contraband.
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.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86779 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
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)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…