Patna High Court
Hefazuddin Ansari @ Hefajodin AnsariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied because the recovery of a commercial quantity of ganja created a reasonable belief that the petitioner had committed the offence and might re‑offend.
Summary
Hefazuddin Ansari was arrested on 7 October 2025 after police recovered 26 kg of ganja from his possession and charged him under Sections 8 and 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. He applied for bail, claiming a clean antecedent, false implication, and non‑compliance of mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. The State opposed bail, arguing that the quantity recovered constitutes a commercial amount, invoking the embargo on bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The Court examined the Supreme Court precedents on bail in NDPS cases and held that the recovery of such a large quantity created a reasonable belief of guilt and a risk of re‑offending. Consequently, the Court refused the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted under the NDPS Act when a commercial quantity of narcotic is recovered.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of knowledge can overcome the presumption of guilt under Section 37.
- Whether the mandatory provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were complied with, affecting bail eligibility.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(b)(ii)(c), 37, 42, 50, 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- commercial quantity
- narcotics
- Section 37
- Section 42
- Section 50
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92060 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-275 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Hefazuddin Ansari @ Hefajodin Ansari S/O Late Sharif Ansari @ Late Sarif
Ansari R/o village Sundarpur @ Sundarpur ward no. 4, Chakraghatta
Nagarpalika @ Sundarpur ward no. 4, Chakghatta Nagarpalika, P.S. -
Malangwa, Dist. - Sarlahi (Nepal).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 06-04-2026 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, A.P.P. for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
07.10.2025, in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 275 of
2025, FIR dated 07.10.2025 registered for the offence under
Sections 8/20 (b)(ii)(c) Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic
Substance Act, 1985.
3. Recovery is of 26 kg of Ganja.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92060 of 2025(5) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
any offence as alleged in the FIR. It appears from the FIR that
altogether 26 kg of Ganja has been recovered from conscious
possession of petitioner and other co-accused and as per
allegation, the accused persons, on seeing the police party tried
to fled away from the place of occurrence but they were
apprehended and they have disclosed their name. He further
submits that there is non-compliance of the mandatory provision
of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on
the basis of the material available on the record, has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that
altogether 26 kilograms of Ganja has been recovered from the
possession of the petitioner and it appears from the FIR that
huge quantity of Ganja was recovered so there is embargo under
Section 37 of the NDPS Act to grant privilege of bail to the
petitioner.
6. 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 petitioner
has not committed the offence and in the event of release he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92060 of 2025(5) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
would not commit similar offence.
7. The issue was considered by the Hon’ble
Supreme 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.
8. The recovery of huge quantity of Ganja from
possession of the petitioner would not justify that the petitioner
had no knowledge of the narcotic nor there is any material to
substantiate that the petitioner would not commit such offence
in the event of release.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and nature of
allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 275
of 2025, pending in the court of learned Special Judge,
Sitamarhi.
10. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…