Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 93 of 2025, Murliganj P.S. Case No. 446 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 8(c), 21(b), 22 of the NDPS Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

¶18

Prosecution allegation, in short, is that total 2493 bottles, each of 100 ml cough syrup containing codeine phosphate and triprolidine hydrochloride have been recovered in this case.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2961 of 2026(3) dt.20-02-2026 2/3

¶21

present case. The petitioner is in custody since 28.10.2025 and has got two criminal antecedents. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. He further contended that the said recovery has been made from the joint house of the petitioner where other family members also reside. The co-accused person has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1498 of 2026.

¶22

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. submits that total 249.300 litres of codeine containing cough syrup has been recovered and therefore, the recovered contraband is above the commercial quantity, hence, there is bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Learned A.P.P. has further relied upon a case of Hon’ble Supreme Court since reported in ( 2020) 20 SCC 272 (Hira Singh and Another versus Union of India and Another) in which the Hon’ble Apex Court held that in case of seizure of mixture of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance with one or more neutral substance(s), the quantity of neutral substance(s) is not to be excluded and to be taken into consideration along with actual content by way of offending

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2961 of 2026(3) dt.20-02-2026 3/3

¶24

drug while determining the “small or commercial quantity” of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance.

¶25

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity coupled with embargo under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S.

¶26

Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶27

The prayer is rejected.

¶28

Learned Trial Court is directed to concluded the trial in an expeditious manner without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournment.

¶29

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶30

Alok Verma/-

Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Mandal v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep Mandal v. The State of Bihar

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

Rashida Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Santosh Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dasrath Kumar @ Dashrath Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Jano Manjhi @ Janeshwar Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Diwakar Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar