Dismissed

Jay Krishna Kumar @ Jay Krishan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Mar 2025CR. MISC./8612/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought regular bail in an excise case involving recovery of large quantities of codeine cough syrup. The court rejected the bail application, noting that the commercial quantity and lack of valid authorization rendered the statutory bail conditions unsatisfied.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's application for regular bail was rejected; he remains in custody pending trial.

Jay Krishna Kumar @ Jay Krishan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8612 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2024 Thana- Excise P.S. District- Khagaria

¶3

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

¶4

Jay Krishna Kumar @ Jay Krishan Kumar S/o Ashok Singh Resident Of Village- Pansalwa, Ps- Beldaur, Dist.- Khagaria

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jai Kishor Poddar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dashrath Mehta ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 18-03-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

¶14

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 and Excise Act.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8612 of 2025(2) dt.18-03-2025 2/4

¶18

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 since17.11.2024.

¶19

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

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8612 of 2025(2) dt.18-03-2025 3/4

¶21

possession of narcotic substance except medical and scientific purposes.

¶22

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

¶23

(i) There are reasonable grounds for believing that the

¶24

accused is not guilty of such offence; and

¶25

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

¶26

bail.

¶27

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.”

¶28

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

¶29

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8612 of 2025(2) dt.18-03-2025 4/4

¶30

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.

¶31

The application stands rejected.

¶32

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶33

atul/-

¶34

U T

Jay Krishna Kumar @ Jay Krishan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jay Krishna Kumar @ Jay Krishan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Barun Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Parvez @ Pravez Vs The State of Bihar

Doli Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ramchandra Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

Minta devi Vs The State of Bihar

Awadhesh Yadav @ Awdhesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar