Md. Parvez @ Md. Parwez @ Prawez vs The State Of Bihar on 28 July, 2026

    0
    7
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Patna High Court – Orders

    Md. Parvez @ Md. Parwez @ Prawez vs The State Of Bihar on 28 July, 2026

    Author: Ashok Kumar Pandey

    Bench: Ashok Kumar Pandey

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37665 of 2026
                            Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2024 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria
                     ======================================================
                     Md. Parvez @ Md. Parwez @ Prawez S/o Md. Elahi R/o Village and Post -
                     Rampur, P.S - Forbesganj, District - Araria
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                     The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Rahul Raj, Advocate.
                     For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                           ORAL ORDER
    
    2   28-07-2026

    Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and

    learned APP for the State.

    SPONSORED

    2. The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the

    offence punishable under Sections 21 and 22 of the Narcotic

    Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

    3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that 90

    bottles, containing total of 9 liters of Eskuf Cough Syrup, along

    with Nitravate-10 tablets, Nitrazip-10 tablets, and Spasm-

    Proxyvon Plus capsules, were recovered from an e-rickshaw.

    4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

    has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no

    offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case.

    Learned counsel further submits that nothing has been recovered

    from the possession of the petitioner. The alleged recovery, if any,

    was made from an e-rickshaw and the driver of the said e-
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37665 of 2026(2) dt.28-07-2026
    2/4

    rickshaw stated that he was carrying the contraband for the

    petitioner. It is further submitted that the witnesses to the seizure

    list are police personnel and that the police have not complied

    with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. Police

    has also not complied with mandatory provision of Section 52A of

    the NDPS Act. Learned counsel also submits that a statement has

    been made in paragraph 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner

    has no criminal antecedents and he is languishing in judicial

    custody since 04.05.2025. It is next submitted that co-accused

    Md. Irshad, who was apprehended along with the e-rickshaw, has

    already been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 73017

    of 2025.

    5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

    Under Notification No. S.O. 826(E) dated 14.11.1985 under the

    Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and Rules, 1985

    that preparations are exempted as manufactured drugs provided

    the preparations contained the narcotic drugs to the extent

    permitted in respect of codeine under Entry No. 35. It is stated

    that codeine and ethyle morphine and their salts including dionine

    all dilutions and preparations are considered to be manufactured

    drugs except those which are compounded with one or more other

    ingredients and containing not more than 100 miligrams of the

    drugs per doses unit and with a concentration of not more than 2.5
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37665 of 2026(2) dt.28-07-2026
    3/4

    % in undivided preparations and which have been established in

    therapeutic practice.

    6. In this case, Eskuf Cough Syrup, along with

    Nitravate-10 tablets, Nitrazip-10 tablets, and Spasm-Proxyvon

    Plus capsules have been recovered from an e-rickshaw and the

    concentration of the codeine in this drug is less than 2.5% as

    provided in the above notification.

    7. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently

    the application for bail and has submitted that in the case of Hira

    Singh and Anr. V. Union of India and Anr., the Hon’ble

    Supreme Court has held that entire non-toxic material which is

    mixed with the contraband will be considered as the contraband

    and as such, the quantity which has been recovered form the

    possession of this petitioner is commercial quantity.

    8. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that in view of

    Section 2(d) of the N.D.P.S. Act, the drug itself is not narcotic

    drug then there is no jurisdictional basis for the case and the Court

    would not have a reason to go into the question of quantities. The

    Central Government has power to issue notification time to time.

    9. Before parting, it is very strange that the cases where

    cough syrups containing codeine are recovered, the police is

    invariably filing cases under N.D.P.S. Act whereas in view of the

    notification of Central Government (supra) concentration of
    Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37665 of 2026(2) dt.28-07-2026
    4/4

    codeine being less than 2.5 %, the quantity does not come under

    the ambit of contraband. Cough syrup containing codeine is only a

    Schedule-H drug for which, the shopkeeper has to maintain

    register and he must be a licensed one. Such type of cases should

    be filed under Drugs and Cosmetic Act. It is only the violation of

    Drugs and Cosmetic Act whereas, police is invariably misusing

    the procedure.

    10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

    considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

    inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

    petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

    bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of

    the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special

    Judge, NDPS Act, Araria in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case

    No. 155 of 2024.

    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
    Sudhanshu/-

    U      T
     



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here