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 1 9 th DAY OF DECEMBER 2022
Crl.Misc.No. 11420/ 2022
Petitioner :
(accused No.1)
Anand S/o.Raju a/a 23 years, R/at
Heggagodi, Thirupalya Main Road,
Bommasandra Post, Attibele Taluk,
Bengaluru
(By Sri.P.Ramamurhty…Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Devanahalli PS
(By Public Prosecutor)
OR D E R
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the
petitioner to enlarge him on bail, in Cr.No.91/2021 of
Devanahalli
PS.,
registered
for
the
offence
punishable
U/Sec.20(b) (ii) (c) of NDPS Act.
2. The prevalent grounds urged seeking bail:-
2
That the petitioner is very 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. The procedure contemplated under N.D.P.S.
Act not followed while recovery. If he is detained in the Central
prison his career will be spoiled in the midst of the other
criminals in the prison. The contraband seized is not
commercial quantity. The petitioner is permanent resident of
the address shown in the cause title. 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 101 Kgs 600 Kgs., of ganja
which is a commercial quantity. There are sufficient material
available against the petitioner, and the said offences are
punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall
not be less than 10 years which may extend to 20 years and
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.11420/2022
3
shall also be liable to fine. The investigation is pending. In the
event of his release he may tamper with the prosecution
witnesses. Incriminatory articles were seized from his custody.
The supplier of drug is absconding. He has to be traced. He
may involve himself in similar offences. Investigating agency
by complying the provisions prevailed under the act has seized
the contraband from the petitioner. The petitioner herein
would sell the drugs to the younger generation which may ruin
the career of younger generation.

With these specific pleas
sought to reject the bail plea of the petitioner.

4. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the
records.
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 Affirmative
4
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:- The PSI, of Devanahalli PS., Bangalore
has presented the complaint before the SHO. The gist of the
allegation reads as here under:On 30.8.2021 at 5.00 pm., when the complainant police
officer is discharging his duty in the police station received
credible information that two persons are engaged in peddling
ganja in front of chocolate House shop situated at Nandi Hills
road, Bangalore. On receipt of the information he along with
staff and panchas has been to the spot and conducted raid.
Accused No.1 who was there in the spot by name Ananda is
apprehended. Another person who had accompanied accused
no.1 i.e., Sagar S/o.Rudresha ran away from the spot. During
search of bag of accused No.1 – 5 Kgs., 200 grams of ganja. A
detail mahazar is drawn. Thereafter, a detail report is prepared
by him and submitted to the SHO. Basing on the said report,
a case in Cr.91/2021 is registered against the petitioner and
accused No.2 Sagar U/s.20(B)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act.

Basing on
the voluntary statement of accused No.1, the present petitioner
5
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.11420/2022
Sachin is apprehended and from the house of petitioner 101
Kgs 600 grams of ganja was seized. He is arrested, produced
before the court and remanded to Judicial Custody.

8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner that
he is planted in the case by the complainant police he is
unaware of seized drug. The seized article is not commercial
quantity. The mandatory provisions of Sec.41, 42, 50, 52 and
47 of the Act are not complied. He is permanent residents of
the address given in the cause title. In the event of grant of
bail he is ready to abide by the conditions which are being
imposed by this court.

9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioner has
committed heinous offence 101 Kg 600 grams of
seized from the petitioner and other accused.

ganja
is
The offence
punishable with imprisonment upto 10 years and with fine.
There are primaнfacie material available against them.
10.

On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
6
30.8.2021 complainant has conducted raid and apprehended
accused. On looking to the seizure panchanama the drugs
seized from petitioner herein is weighing 5 Kgs., 200 grams of
ganja. As per specification of small and commercial quantity of
narcotic drug or psychotropic substance issued by Ministry of
Finance Department of Revenue Notification S.O.1055(E) dated
19.10.2001 at Sl.No.55 the narcotic drugнganja 1000 grams is
small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial quantity.

In this
case the quantum of ganja seized is 5 Kg 200 of ganja is an
intermediate quantity. As per the decision of Hon’ble Apex
Court reported in 2018 11 SCC 488 Birbal Prasad Vs.,
State of Bihar wherein it is held that:
Ss.37 and 20 Ц Bail Ц grant of Ц non commercial quantity Ц
quantity involved being only 14 Kgs., of ganja, which is a
non commercial quantity appellant accused not involved in
any other case Ц in above circumstances, held, appellant
should be released on bail, pending trial Ц hence, directions
issued to release appellant on bail, on certain conditions.

The said case law aptly applies to the case on hand in holding
that the contraband seized in the case on hand is intermediate
quantity and it is not commercial quantity.

In the said
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.11420/2022
7
circumstances, as per the observations of Hon’ble Apex Court
the bail plea of accused to be considered.
11. Here in this case the drugs seized by the investigating
agency to the tune of 5 Kgs 200 grams of ganja which is an
intermediate
quantity.

When
the
quantity
is
less
than
commercial quantity, rigors of Sec.37 of the NDPS Act will not
attract, and factors become similar to bail petitions under
regular statues normal, unless the prosecution points towards
exceptional circumstances.
12. On perusing the investigation papers, investigation
in the case is concluded and charge sheet is filed. The seizure
of contraband from the present petitioner is intermediary in
nature. There is discrepancy in showing the time of arrest of
accused No.3 which is based on the statement of accused
No.1. The year of recording voluntary statement is shown to
be 2020 instead of 2021. the time of arrest of accused No.3 is
shown as 7.00 pm., where as in the remand application the
time of arrest of accused No.3 is shown as 11.00 pm.

The
accused who ran away from the spot is one Sagar, but accused
8
No.3 one Sachin is arrested by police. All these circumstances
in the case creates doubt of seizure of huge quantum of
contraband at the instance of accused Nos.1 and 3. that apart
the seizure alleged to have been effected from the present
petitioner is 5 Kgs., 200 grams of ganja. The offence alleged
against the petitioner is not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life.

Further custodial interrogation is not
warranted. His Voluntary statement is already recorded. As per
the information provided by the petitioner he is permanently
residing in the address shown in the cause title. The
apprehension of the prosecution that he may abscond and may
protract the trial could be compensated by imposing stringent
conditions. In the result, I answer the point for consideration
in the affirmative.
13. 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 allowed.

9
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.11420/2022
The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with Two
sureties for the like sum with following conditions.
1
He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this
court without prior permission.

2
He shall not tamper the witness or abscond.

3
He shall not commit similar offence or
any offence while on bail.

4
He shall furnish his photo ID proof and
photo ID proof of his sureties.

5
He shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

6
Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioner would entail cancellation of bail.

[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 19th day of December 2022)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*