IN THE COURT OF THE XXXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE & SPL. JUDGE (NDPS), BENGALURU.
CCH.33.
PRESENT:
SMT. B.S. JAYASHREE, LL.M.,
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE (NDPS),
BENGALURU.
DATED: THIS THE 2nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023
Crl. Misc.No.7775/2023
Petitioner :
(accused No.1)
Anand Chandran, S/o.late K V
chandran, 29 years, No.07, D Block,
No.304, 3rd Floor, Presdident Sunworth
Apartment, Kengeri, Bengaluru 560
060.
(By Sri.BM., Adv.
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Sudaguntepalya PS
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the
petitioner to enlarge him on bail, in Cr.No.17/2023 of
Suddaguntepalya PS., for the offences punishable U/Sec.8(c),
22(c), 20(ii)(a) & 29 of N.D.P.S. Act.

2. The prevalent grounds urged seeking bail:-
2
That the petitioner is innocent and law abiding citizen.
He has not committed any offence much less the offence as
alleged. He has been falsely implicated by the respondent in
this case. Though the alleged offence is non bailable, but is
neither punishable with imprisonment for life or death
sentence. As per the FSL report article No.1 is positive for N, NDimethylpentylone
and
responded
negative
for
methamphetamine/MDMA. The said N-Dimethylpentylone is
not mentioned in Schedule Ц 1 of NDPS Act. Articles No.2 is
positive for amphetamine, Methylenedioxy methamphetamine
(MDMA)
and
caffeine.

The
commercial
quantity
for
amphetamine is 50 grams and the alleged seizure is 43.43
grams the same is below commercial quantity as per the
notification of the central govt. The other two articles seized
under panchanama are small quantities of ganja and hashish
oil.

Hence, invocation of sec.37 of the Act does not attract
against the petitioner on the said ground also the petitioner is
entitled for bail. No procedure under the NDPS Act and
Cr.P.C., has been followed while arresting and seizing the
contraband.

The investigation in the case is completed and
3
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7775/2023
charge sheet has been filed and the accused is not required for
further investigation. Hence, the custody of the accused
becomes a pre-trial conviction, the same is in violation of
Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The respondent police
drew samples of the seized contraband vide inventory dated
8.2.2023 to send the same to FSL on 21.2.2023 after lapse of
13 days and no material in the charge sheet to show that in
whose possession the samples had remained during the period
of 7.2.2023 to 20.2.2023. He is no way involved in the crime.
The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions
imposed by this court in the event of grant of bail. He is ready
to offer surety for his due appearance before this court.
Hence, sought to grant bail.

3. The prosecution while opposing the bail petition
contended that the I.O has seized 102.21 grams of MDMA
crystal, 43.43 grams of MDMA ecstasy pills, 267.74 grams of
ganja, 83.37 grams of hashish oil from the house of accused
Nos.1 to 3.

The offences alleged against the petitioner
is
punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term upto 20
4
years and shall also be liable to fine. There is a primafacie case
available against the petitioner. He is habitual drug dealer.
There is primafacie case made out against petitioner. If the
petitioner is released on bail, he will continue the profession of
narcotic drug selling, and he may abscond and tamper
evidence of the prosecution. Hence, sought to reject the bail
plea of petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
prosecution.
5. The points that arise for my consideration are as here
under:
1.

Whether petitioner has made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge him on
bail?

2. What order?

6. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Negative
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7775/2023
5
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:- The PI., CCB (W & N) has put the
criminal law into motion. The gist of the allegation reads as
here under:On 23.01.2023 at about 12.00 noon the complainant has
received credible information from an informant that some
persons are selling narcotic drugs at house No.203, 2 nd floor,
2nd Main, 3rd Cross, Venkateshwara layout, Suddaguntepalya,
Bangalore. On receipt of the said information, he has informed
the matter to ACP, obtained the permission to conduct raid.
He has called the panchas. He along with panchas and staff
had been to the spot and found accused Nos.1 to 3 in the
house. On enquiry they have revealed their names and
addresses. On further probing they have revealed that they are
in possession of MDMA, ganja, hashish oil. During the search
they seized 102.21 grams of MDMA crystal, 43.43 grams of
MDMA ecstasy pills, 267.74 grams of ganja, 83.37 grams of
hashish oil and a weighing machine. It was seized under a
detail mahazar. Accused were arrested. A detail report is
prepared submitted before SHO. The said report is the basis
6
to the register case is against the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime
No.17/2023 for the offences punishable under Sec.8(c), 22(c),
20(ii)(a) & 29 of N.D.P.S. Act. The petitioner herein is accused
No.1 in the case. Now, the investigation is concluded and
charge sheet is filed.

8. On looking to the prosecution papers the quantum of
narcotic substance seized 102.21 grams of MDMA crystal,
43.43 grams of MDMA ecstasy pills, 267.74 grams of ganja,
83.37 grams of hashish oil. The sample is collected out of the
bulk seized contraband and is submitted to FSL for analysis.
As per the FSL report article No.1 which is sample taken out of
bulk 102.21 grams of MDMA crystal i.e., 3 grams has
responded positive for N-Dimethylpentylone and responded
negative for methamphetamine/MDMA. Articles No.2 is the
sample taken out of MDMA ecstasy pills weighing 43.43 grams
i.e.,
3
grams
sent
for
analysis
responded
positive
for
amphetamine, Methylenedioxy methamphetamine (MDMA) and
caffeine. Article Nos.3 and 4 have responded positive for
cannabis and hash oil. As per specification of small and
7
commercial
quantity
of
narcotic
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7775/2023
drug
or
psychotropic
substance issued by Ministry of Finance Department of
Revenue
Notification
S.O.1055(E)
dated
19.10.2001
at
Sl.No.134 the narcotic drug Ц MDMA weighing 0.5 grams is
small quantity and 10 grams is a commercial quantity. In the
present case 102.21 grams of MDMA crystal seized from the
possession of A1 to 3 answered negative for presence of
MDMA/methamphetamine. On the other hand 43.43 grams of
MDMA ecstasy pills seized from A1 to 3 answered positive for
amphetamine, MDMA and caffeine. In the instant case MDMA
seized from the present petitioner to the tune of 43.43 grams
which is corroborated by the FSL report is a commercial
quantity.

9.

The NDPS Act provides deterrent punishment for
various offences relating to illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs
and psychotropic substances. In the recent judgment of
Hon’ble Apex Court
in the case of State of Kerala Vs.,
Rajesh in (2020) 12 SCC 122 it is observed that
Уreasonable groundsФ means something more than prima facie
grounds. It contemplates substantial probable causes for believing
8
that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence. The reasonable
belief contemplated in the provision requires existence of such facts
and circumstances as are sufficient in themselves to justify
satisfaction that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence. In
the case on hand, the High Court seems to have completely
overlooked the underlying object of Section 37 that in addition to
the limitations provided under the CrPC, or any other law for the
time being in force, regulating the grant of bail, its liberal approach
in the matter of bail under the NDPS Act is indeed uncalled for.

Further in the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of State of MP Vs., Kajad reported in 2001(7)SCC 673
while considering an appeal against an order of the High Court
allowing the second bail petition of the respondent who was
petitioner under the NDPS Act has held that :
“5. ………….. Negation of bail is the rule and its grant an
exception under sub-clause (ii) of clause (b) of Section 37(1).
For granting the bail the court must, on the basis of the record
produced before it, be satisfied that there are reasonable
grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the
offences with which he is charged and further that he is not
likely to commit any offence while on bail. It has further to be
noticed that the conditions for granting the bail, specified in
clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 37 are in addition to the
limitations provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure or
any other law for the time being in force regulating the grant
9
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7775/2023
of bail. Liberal approach in the matter of bail under the Act is
uncalled for.Ф
As per the enunciation of law in the aforesaid dictums’ it is
clear that no person shall be granted bail unless the two
conditions are satisfied, i.e., the satisfaction of the court that
there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is
not guilty and that he is not likely to commit any offence while
on bail. In this case, 43.43 grams of MDMA ecstasy pills,
267.74 grams of ganja, 83.37 grams of hashish oil seized from
the conscious possession of the petitioner and accused Nos.2
& 3.

At this stage, there is primafacie material available
against the petitioner in regard to possessing the contraband
at the time of his apprehension. The total recovery of
contraband MDMA in the case is commercial quantity. The
learned counsel for petitioner has failed to place any material
before this court that he was not doing the trade of contraband
at the time of his apprehension and search. In the result, I
proceed to hold that the petitioner herein has not made out
any grounds to entertain his plea for bail. Accordingly, I
answer point No.1 in the negative.

10
10. Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER
The petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.439 of
Cr.P.C is hereby rejected.
[Dictated to the stenographer, directly on the computer, typed and
computerised by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in
Open Court on this the 2nd day of September 2023)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*