Suraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72269 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- Mufassil District- Khagaria ====================================================== Suraj Kumar S/o Kari Lal Saw R/o Village - Saini Tola, P.S - Simari Bakhtiyarpur, District - Saharsa, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Seema Kumari, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-11-2025 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 N.D.P.S. Spl. Case No. 21 of 2025 arising out of Khagaria Muffasil P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21 and 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, total 140 bottles each of 100 ml. i.e. total 14 litres of Codeine Phosphate and Triprolidine Hydrochloride Syrup (Wiscof Cough Syrup) was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

2/4 this case. As per the seizure list, the recovery has been made from N.H. 31 and no incriminating article has been recovered from the physical or conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 11.08.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the seized contraband is the commercial quantity and the petitioner had no 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.

3/4

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 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 N.D.P.S. Spl. Case No. 21 of 2025 arising out of Khagaria Muffasil P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S.) Khagaria/ concerned

4/4 Court below.

9. The application stands rejected.

10. The learned trial court is further directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Jyoti/- U T