The Patna High Court has granted bail to an accused individual, Bharat Kumar, while delivering a sharp critique of law enforcement agencies for the persistent misuse of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act in cases involving cough syrups containing codeine. The Court ruled that where the concentration of codeine remains within the permissible limits set by central notifications, the substance cannot be treated as contraband under the NDPS framework, and consequently, registering such cases under the stringent provisions of that Act lacks a jurisdictional basis.

The case originated from an incident in the Khagaria district, where 484 liters of 'Cough Linctur RJT-SCEN' syrup were recovered from a pick-up van. Bharat Kumar was subsequently arrested on May 16, 2026, and charged under Sections 21(c), 8(c), and 29 of the NDPS Act. Following his incarceration, he sought bail, arguing that he had no connection to the vehicle or the seized cargo and that the recovery process itself failed to adhere to mandatory legal standards. His legal counsel highlighted that the concentration of codeine in the recovered syrup was well below the 2.5 percent threshold established by the Central Government, effectively exempting the product from being classified as a manufactured drug under existing notifications.

Challenging the Jurisdictional Basis of Seizure

During the proceedings, the petitioner challenged the state’s approach, relying on the Central Government’s Notification No. S.O. 826(E) issued on November 14, 1985. This notification provides a clear exemption for preparations containing codeine, provided the amount per dosage unit does not exceed 100 milligrams and the total concentration remains under 2.5 percent, provided the drug is intended for therapeutic use. The defense argued that because the syrup in question met these criteria, the prosecution’s attempt to characterize the recovery as a violation of the NDPS Act was legally flawed.

The Court found significant merit in the petitioner’s argument, observing that the fundamental definition of a "narcotic drug" under Section 2(d) of the NDPS Act does not encompass such pharmaceutical preparations. The Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey noted, "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." By determining that the substance did not fall within the scope of the Act, the Court effectively signaled that the entire premise of the prosecution’s case was built upon an erroneous application of the law, making it unnecessary to evaluate whether the quantity of the seized material met the criteria for a commercial quantity .

Examining the Prosecution’s Reliance on Commercial Quantities

The State, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, attempted to defend the charges by invoking the precedent set in the Supreme Court judgment of Hira Singh and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr. The prosecution argued that the entire volume of the seized material, including non-toxic carrier agents mixed with the contraband, should be considered when determining the weight for the purpose of the NDPS Act. By this logic, the state maintained that the seizure of 484 liters constituted a massive commercial quantity, justifying the severe charges leveled against the accused.

However, the Court distinguished the present case from such precedents, reiterating that the legal classification of the substance must precede any discussion regarding the quantity recovered. If the substance is not a narcotic drug under the statute, the procedural mechanisms concerning commercial quantities, which often mandate stringent bail conditions and longer prison terms, do not apply. The Court emphasized that the Central Government holds the exclusive authority to issue notifications defining these substances, and those notifications must be strictly adhered to by the police when deciding which legislative framework to apply to a specific recovery.

Systemic Concerns Over Procedure

In its final order, the Court expressed deep concern over the trend of police officers across the state routinely invoking the NDPS Act for pharmaceutical cases. The Court pointed out that cough syrup containing codeine is categorized as a Schedule-H drug under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The regulatory requirements for such drugs mandate that a licensed pharmacist maintain accurate records of sales and distribution, and violations of these rules should properly be handled as administrative or criminal breaches under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, rather than being escalated to the level of drug trafficking offenses.

Expressing surprise at this repetitive pattern, Justice Pandey stated, "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 codeine being less than 2.5 %, the quantity does not come under the ambit of contraband ." The Court further remarked, "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."

The ruling serves as a significant check on the exercise of police powers in Bihar, emphasizing that the enforcement of narcotics law must remain tethered to the specific definitions and exemptions provided by the legislature and the executive. The Court directed that Bharat Kumar be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of ₹10,000 with two sureties of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, NDPS Act, in Khagaria. The case stands as a firm reminder that the judicial system will intervene when procedural shortcuts are taken at the expense of substantive legal definitions and the rights of the accused.