Patna High Court
Gunjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied because the contraband exceeded the commercial quantity, invoking the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Summary
Gunjan Kumar was arrested in connection with a case under the NDPS Act for alleged possession of 723.67 grams of brown sugar, which exceeds the commercial quantity. The petitioner, claiming innocence and no prior criminal record, applied for bail, arguing that the provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were not complied with. The State opposed bail, contending that the quantity recovered triggers a bar on bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The Patna High Court examined the facts, noted the contraband exceeded commercial limits, and applied the statutory bar. Consequently, the court rejected the bail application, denying the petitioner's request for release.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted when the quantity of narcotic substance recovered exceeds the commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 21(C), 25, 29, 37, 42, 50, 8(C)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- Section 37
- drug offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91807 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- NAUGACHIA District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Gunjan Kumar Son of Sanjay Kumar Sharma @ Sanjay Sharma R/o Village -
Bhavanipur, Sahu Tola Naugachhia, Distt - Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prakash Chandra Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in Naugachhia P.S. Case
No. 288 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 8(C)
21(C) , 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. Prosecution allegation, in short, is that the 723.67
gram of brown sugar (smack) has been recovered in this case.
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 08.09.2025 and
has got no criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of
tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Learned
counsel further submits nothing has been recovered from the
premises and possession of the petitioner. The provision of
Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act has not been complied.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91807 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/2
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.
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)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…