Jay Krishna Kumar @ Jai Krishna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 29462 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Khagaria ====================================================== Jay Krishna Kumar @ Jai Krishna Kumar S/O Ashok Singh R/o villPansalwa, ward no. 11, P.S.- Beldour, Distt.- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Diwakar Prasad Singh, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This is the 3rd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 09 of 2025 (Special Case No. 13 of 2025) corresponding to Excise P.S. Case No. 342 of 2024 arising out of Excise Case No. 1423C3 of 2024 registered for the offence under Section 30(a)(F) PF of the Bihar Excise Prohibition Amendment Act, 2018.

3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 18.03.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 8612 of 2025 which reads as follows:- "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Khagaria Excise P.S. Case No. 342/2024 (Excise Case No. 1423C3/2024) dated 17.11.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/s 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition

2/4 and Excise Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 55 litres of Codeine Phosphate & Triprolidine HCL syrup, RTX-scen cough syrup were recovered from the house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The prosecution has been lodged against the petitioner under section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act not the N.D.P.S. Act. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has clean criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 17.11.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the seized contraband is commercial quantity i.e. 55 litres of Codeine Cough Syrup and the petitioner has no any valid authorization for keeping the same. It is further submitted that this case comes under the N.D.P.S. Act and the Drugs and Cosmetics Act as per section 80 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Learned APP for the State has placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Hira Singh and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Anr, (2020)20 Supreme Court Cases 272 of Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "weight of entire materials/ mixture along with neutral material is to be considered for ascertainment of whether the quantity is "small quantity" or "commercial quantity". It is further submitted that codeine is mentioned in the Entry No. 28 of the N.D.P.S. Act. The act of the petitioner amounts to clear violation of section 8 of the N.D.P.S. Act as it clearly prohibits possession of narcotic substance except medical and scientific purposes.

6. As per Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the two conditions are that the Court should be satisfied with :- (i) There are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not

3/4 guilty of such offence; and (ii) He is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

7. If either of these two conditions is not satisfied, the bar operates and the accused cannot be released on bail. The Court is of the opinion that the parameters of bail available under Section 37 of the Act have not satisfied in the facts of the instant case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Narcotics Control Bureau v. Mohit Aggarwal 2022 SCC OnLine SC 891 has held that "The length of the period of his custody or the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial has commenced are by themselves not considerations that can be treated as persuasive grounds for granting relief to the respondent under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act."

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the recovery of commercial quantity from the conscious possession of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is rejected in connection with Khagaria Excise P.S. Case No. 342/2024 (Excise Case No. 1423C3/2024), pending in the Court of learned Special Excise Judge II, Khagaria.

9. The application stands rejected."

4. As per the prosecution case, total 55 litres of Codeine Phosphate & Triprolidine HCL Syrup, RTX-seen Cough Syrup were recovered from the kitchen room of the house of the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no progress in the case after framing of charge on 10.06.2025 and no witness has been examined.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail.

4/4

7. Considering the huge recovery, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

9. The Superintendent of Police, Khagaria is directed to ensure the appearance of the witnesses in the trial.

10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Khagaria through FAX and e-mail forthwith for its compliance.

11. If the trial is not concluded within one year because of the delay caused by the prosecution, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) sadique/- U