Patna High Court
Md. Izrail AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted as the seized quantity was not a commercial quantity and thus Section 37 of the NDPS Act did not apply.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Izrail Alam, was arrested on 31 October 2025 for alleged possession of 2.8 litres of codeine syrup, alleged under Sections 8(c) and 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. He applied for bail, contending that the seized quantity was below the commercial quantity and that, therefore, Section 37 of the NDPS Act – which bars bail in cases involving commercial quantities – did not apply. The State opposed bail but also acknowledged that the quantity was below the commercial threshold. The Court noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the fact that the quantity was not commercial, concluding that there was no statutory embargo on granting bail. Accordingly, the Court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions for appearance and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether Section 37 of the NDPS Act bars bail when the seized narcotic quantity is below the commercial quantity
- Whether the petitioner is eligible for bail despite the charges under Sections 8(c) and 21(c) of the NDPS Act
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(c), 37, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- codeine syrup
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91000 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-271 Year-2025 Thana- KRITYANAND NAGAR District-
Purnia
======================================================
Md. Izrail Alam S/o Md. Gaffar R/o Village- Islampur, P.S- K Nagar, Dist-
Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard Mr.Abhishek, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
31.10.2025 in connection with K.Nagar P.S.Case No. 271 of
2025, FIR dated 31.10.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections Sections 8(c)/21(c) of N.D.P.S.Act.
3. Recovery is of 28 pieces containing 100 ml. in each
bottle Codeine Syrup (Total 2.8 Liters).
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. It appears from
the FIR that altogether 28 pieces containing 100 ml. in each
bottle Codeine Syrup (Total 2.8 Liters) has been recovered
from the shop of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91000 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
petitioner submits that the seized article is not under the
commercial quantity. Hence, there is no embargo under Section
37 of the N.D.P.S.Act for grant of bail to the petitioner and
there is non-compliance of mandatory provisions of NDPS Act
and the police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against
the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 31.10.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner but
fairly submits that the recovered article is less than the
commercial quantity.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean
antecedent and the recovered article is less than the commercial
quantity, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Special Judge, (NDPS Act), Purnea in connection with K.Nagar
P.S.Case No. 271 of 2025, with the following conditions:-
(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91000 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below 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 court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…