IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.25738 of 2008 JAGDEO MAHTO @ JAADEO MAHTO Versus THE UNION OF INDIA ----------- 2/ 29.08.2008 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the State and learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India. The petitioner is being prosecuted for possessing 110 kg. of ganja. Submission is that the ganja was moist and was recovered not from the possession of the petitioner rather it was from another person. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India has clarified that the petitioner is the same person from whom ganja was recovered and it is mentioned in the complaint petition itself that Teji Mahto is the real name of Jagdeo Mahto. The provision of grant of bail to an accused who is involved in offence relating to recovery of commercial quantity is prescribed under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act and the accused is entitled to be released only if the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. There is nothing on record from which these inferences can be drawn. Considering the legal position and the quantity of recovery, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. kksinha/ (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)