Unauthorized Possession Of Codeine-Based Cough Syrup Falls Under NDPS Act: Patna High Court
The Patna High Court has reiterated that bail under the NDPS Act remains a stringent exception, particularly in cases involving commercial quantities of codeine-based cough syrup.“Negation of bail is a rule and grant of it is an exception," held Justice Jitendra Kumar, reiterating that unauthorised possession of codeine-based cough syrup, even with less than 2.5% concentration, falls within...
The Patna High Court has reiterated that bail under the NDPS Act remains a stringent exception, particularly in cases involving commercial quantities of codeine-based cough syrup.
“Negation of bail is a rule and grant of it is an exception," held Justice Jitendra Kumar, reiterating that unauthorised possession of codeine-based cough syrup, even with less than 2.5% concentration, falls within the ambit of the NDPS Act when possessed in commercial quantity, and that bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is an exception rather than the rule.
The petitioner and the Co-accused were arrested under Sections 20 and 22 of the NDPS Act. SSB personnel intercepted a silver Tata Indigo Manza car moving from India to Nepal. On searching the vehicle in the presence of the driver and another occupant, 40 bottles (100 ml each) of cough syrup containing Codeine Phosphate and Triprolidine Hydrochloride were recovered from beneath the seat. The cough syrup was branded Oxerex, Batch No. ONTS-1663. Along with the contraband, one Oppo Reno 8 5G mobile phone, two SIM cards, and the vehicle itself were seized.
The petitioner had earlier applied for anticipatory bail before the Special Court, NDPS, Madhubani, which was rejected. The Special Court observed that the recovery of 40 bottles of cough syrup falls within the definition of commercial quantity as per Hira Singh v. Union of India (2020) 20 SCC 272. Witness statements in the case diary supported the prosecution's version, and given the restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, anticipatory bail was denied.
The court stated that “when weight of the codeine along with the weight of neutral substance is taken into consideration, the weight of the seized cough syrup constitutes “commercial quantity” in the light of Note-4 to the Notification specifying small quantity and commercial quantity, dated 19.10.2001 and in the light of Hira Singh Case (supra)."
It thus held, "Hence, Section 37 of the NDPS Act also comes into play against grant of bail to the petitioner, as per which not only Public Prosecutor is required to be heard at the time of consideration of the bail petition of the accused, even twin conditions as provided in Section 37 of the NDPS Act have to be fulfilled to grant bail to the accused. Moreover, these conditions are cumulative and not alternative ones. Here, negation of bail is a rule and grant of it is an exception”
The court reemphasised the twin conditions as provided in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which are as follows: (a) The satisfaction of the court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence, and that (b) He is not likely to commit any offence while on bail
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the bail plea, reiterating the strict bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act in cases involving commercial quantities.
Case title: Nilendra Kumar Karan v. State of Bihar
Case No.: Criminal miscellaneous No.54100 of 2025
Counsel: For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate Mr. Pankaj Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State: Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP