Rajesh Kumar vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Rajesh Kumar (owner of B.K. Distributors) and Rakesh Kumar Singh (owner of Ganesh Pharma), are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Jaipur P.S. Case No. 50 of 2025, registered under Sections 21(c), 22(c), and 25 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution alleges that on June 27, 2025, during vehicle checking, a truck was intercepted, and 20,000 bottles of Codine Cough Syrup were recovered. The driver and helper fled, but the truck's driver and helper were apprehended. Bills found in the truck indicated the consignment was from Ganesh Pharma, Deoghar, to B.K. Distributors, Lakhisarai. The petitioners claim they are licensed distributors and consignors/consignees of the cough syrup, and the discrepancy in billing was due to staff error.
Held
The Court granted anticipatory bail to both petitioners, Rajesh Kumar and Rakesh Kumar Singh. The Court considered the submissions that the petitioners are owners of firms holding valid licenses to deal with Codine Cough Syrup. The alleged error in generating multiple bills instead of a single one was attributed to staff negligence. The Court found that the petitioners had valid licenses and that the consignment was being transported as per the orders received. The ratio decidendi is that where a petitioner holds a valid license for the substance and the alleged contravention pertains to procedural irregularities in documentation, and the petitioner claims clean antecedents, anticipatory bail may be granted, subject to furnishing bail bonds and sureties. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners, as licensed distributors and consignors/consignees of Codine Cough Syrup, can be held liable under the NDPS Act for alleged discrepancies in billing, given their valid licenses and claims of staff error? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Sections 21(c), 22(c), 25 of the NDPS Act and relevant drug control provisions). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contend they possess valid licenses under Rule 20B, 21B, and 61(1) of the relevant drug control rules to deal with medicines like Codine Cough Syrup. They assert that the consignment was dispatched with proper documentation, including e-way bills, and the issue of multiple bills was an administrative error by their staff. They claim clean antecedents. Revenue's arguments: The State, through the learned APP, opposed both bail petitions, implying that the recovery of a large quantity of cough syrup, even if licensed, warrants investigation under the NDPS Act.
Sections Cited
Sections 21(c), 22(c), 25 of the NDPS Act, Rule 20B, Rule 21B, Rule 61(1), Rule 61(2), Form 2'B', Form 20(B), Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER 3 18-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learned A.P.P. for the State (in both cases).
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 21(c), 22(c), 25 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 2/4 27.06.2025, at about 20:20 hours, the informant, who is S.I. of Police, during vehicle checking at Chaualis More, intercepted a truck bearing registration no. JH03AN2039. By seeing the police party, the persons travelling on said truck, managed to flee from the spot taking advantage of darkness, whereas the driver of the said truck and his helper were nabbed. Upon query, the driver disclosed his name as Chandan Yadav and his helper disclosed his name as Raju Kumar Yadav. Upon search, 20000 bottles each of 100 ml (total 2000 liters) of Codine Cough Syrup were recovered from the truck along with bill addressing as from Ganesh Pharma Deoghar to B.K. Distributors Lakhisarai were recovered from the cabin of the seized truck. In Cr.Misc. No. 72896 of 2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner (Rajesh Kumar) submits that petitioner is owner of M/s B.K.Distributors Lakhisarai and he is the consignee of the alleged cough syrup, having valid license under Rule 20B, 21B Rule 61(1) to deal with the medicine likewise Codeine Cough syrup. He further submits that on 07.06.2025, through two Invoice No. G/MKT/25-26/0748 & 0749 e-way bill No. 322015870880 and 392015877431 Windlas Biotech Limited, 10,000 & 10,000 bottles of Wiscof syrup sent its C&F by M/s Ganesh Pharma, 3/4 Deoghar Jharkhand through Shiv Shakti Transport. He next submits that M/s Ganesh Pharma, Deoghar also holds a valid license, issued by Drug Control Director at Deoghar, under Rule 61(2) in Form 2’B’ and Rule 61(1) in Form 20(B), which is valid from 13.01.2025 to 12.01.2030. The aforesaid consignment i.e. cough syrup is of petitioner’s firm, which was sent by M/s Ganesh Pharma, Deoghar, but due to error on the part of staff of M/s Ganesh Pharma, instead of generating 20 different bills, the said firm generated only 4 bills. Petitioner claims clean antecedent. In Cr.Misc. No. 74567 of 2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner (Rakesh Kumar Singh) submits that petitioner is owner of M/s Ganesh Pharma Chopamore, Deoghar (Jharkhand). He is the consignor of aforesaid seized cough syrup. The firm of the petitioner is also registered under GST under Government of India and its Registration No. 20ATGPS4210B1ZB. The firm had dispatched the consignment to M/s B.K. Distributors, Lakhisarai, as per their different 20 orders of 10 case placed on 26.06.2025 & 27.06.2025, but due to laches on the part of staff of the firm, separate bills could not be issued. Petitioner claim clean antecedent.
4/4
Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed both bail petitions.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner of both cases namely Rajesh Kumar and Rakesh Kumar Singh, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, NDPS, Banka in connection with Jaipur P.S. Case No. 50 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. anay (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.