Dismissed¶26

Neetish Kumar Singh @ Neetish Kumar v. The Union of India through the Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Patna HC15 Apr 2025CR. MISC./71778/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS Act Section 37 twin conditions bail bar; commercial quantity ganja 65.600 kgs recovered from Hyundai Santro WB-74U-0423; DRI Patna Unit Case No. 02 of 2024-2025 dated 23.07.2024; Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 29 NDPS Act; Narcotics Control Bureau v. Mohit Aggarwal 2022 SCC OnLine SC 891 relied on; custody since 08.05.2024 not a persuasive ground; bail application dismissed; Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71778 of 2024; Justice Chandra Prakash Singh.

What did the court decide?

If either of the two conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not satisfied, the bar operates and the accused cannot be released on bail. ¶23

Neetish Kumar Singh @ Neetish Kumar Vs The Union of India… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71778 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2024 Thana- D.R.I District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Neetish Kumar Singh @ Neetish Kumar S/O Sri Ramprawesh Singh Resident of village-Purushottampur, P.S- Dighwara, District- Saran at Chhapra

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Union of India through the Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Regional Unit, Patna.

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Hemant Ray, Adv. For UOI (DRI) : Mr. Sanchay Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Ankit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sushant Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Ashish Kumar Patil, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh (Asg) ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 15-04-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

A.P.P for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with F. No. DRI/LZU/PRU/718 (ii) ENQ/14/2024 appertaining to DRI Patna Unit Case No. 02 of 2024-2025 dated 23.07.2024 registered for the offence/s punishable u/ss 20(b)(ii) ©, 25, 29 of the NDPS Act.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, total 65.600 kgs. Ganja was recovered from the Hyundai Santro car bearing Registration No. WB-74U-0423 and the petitioner and the co-accused person

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71778 of 2024(5) dt.15-04-2025 2/3

¶17

were found sitting inside the car.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the 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 08.05.2024.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner. The petitioner is one of the occupants of the said vehicle. The petitioner had no any valid authorization for keeping the said contraband. The said offence is related to the offence of NDPS Act and the Drug and Cosmetic Act.

¶20

As per Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the two conditions are that the Court should be satisfied with :-

¶21

(i) There are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence; and

¶22

(ii) He is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

¶23

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

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71778 of 2024(5) dt.15-04-2025 3/3

¶25

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.”

¶26

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the recovery of commercial quantity of Ganja i.e. 65.600 kgs. from the conscious possession of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶27

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶28

guddukr/-

Neetish Kumar Singh @ Neetish Kumar v. The Union of India through the Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neetish Kumar Singh @ Neetish Kumar v. The Union of India through the Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjeet Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Sintu Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nirmal Ray Vs the State of Bihar

Chhotu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shashikant Paswan @ Shashikan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar