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 13th DAY OF MARCH 2024
Crl.Misc.No.2323/2024
Petitioner :
(accused)
Harshavardhan, S/o.Shekar, 25
years, R/at.Dabapete, Sompura
Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk.
(By Sri Ramanna, Adv.)
V/S.
State by K.P.Agrahara PS
Respondent :
(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.22/2024 of
K.P.Agrahara
PS,
registered
for
the
offence
U/Sec.20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act.
2. The prevalent grounds urged seeking bail:­
punishable
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. 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 1 Kg., 260 grams of ganja.
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 shall also be liable to fine.
The investigation is pending.

In the event of his release he
3
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.2323/2024
may tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Incriminatory
articles were seized from his custody. 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
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
4
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:­ The PSI, of K.P.Agrahara PS., Bangalore
has presented the complaint before the SHO. The gist of the
allegation reads as here under:­
On17.2.2024 at about 11.30 am., when the complainant
was in the police station he has received credible information
through an informant that near KP Agrahara, 14 th Main, Binni
Canteen, KP Agrahara, Bangalore one person wearing Black
colour T shirt and blue colour half pant is selling ganja to the
customers. On receipt of the information he has registered a
case in Cr.No.22/2024 against unknown person for the offence
punishable U/s.20(b)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act.

Thereafter, he
informed the matter to ACP, obtained persons. He has secured
the panchas, he along with panchas and staff went to the spot
and found a person moving there suspiciously. On enquiry he
revealed his name and address. When he was questioned
about the contents of the bag in his possession, he has stated
that he is carrying ganja. The said ganja was seized and on
weighing it came around 1 Kg., 260 grams. A detail mahazar
is drawn and incriminatory ganja is seized. The accused was
5
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.2323/2024
arrested and 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 search and seizure 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 1 Kg., 260
grams of ganja
is
seized from the petitioner. The offence punishable with
imprisonment upto 10 years and with fine. There are
primafacie material available against them.
10.

On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
17.2.2024 complainant has conducted raid and apprehended
accused. On looking to the seizure panchanama the drugs
6
seized from petitioner herein is weighing 1 Kg., 260 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 drug­ganja 1000 grams is
small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial quantity. In this
case the quantum of ganja seized is 1 Kg., 260 grams 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 – Bail – grant of – non commercial quantity –
quantity involved being only 14 Kgs., of ganja, which is a
non commercial quantity appellant accused not involved in
any other case – in above circumstances, held, appellant
should be released on bail, pending trial – 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
circumstances, as per the observations of Hon’ble Apex Court
the bail plea of accused to be considered.

CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.2323/2024
7
11. Here in this case the drugs seized by the investigating
agency to the tune of 1 Kg., 260 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. The major portion of the investigation is concluded.
The offence alleged against the petitioner is not punishable
with
death or imprisonment for life. Further
custodial
interrogation is not warranted. 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:
8
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.439 of
Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/­ with one
surety for the like sum with following conditions.
1.

The petitioner shall give attendance before
the concerned I.O., once in a month i.e.,
preferably on first Monday of every month in
between 10.00 am., to 2.00 pm., till filing of
charge sheet or further orders whichever is
earlier.

2.

He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this
court without prior permission.

3.

He shall not tamper the witness or abscond.

4.

He
shall
co­operate
investigation.

5.

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

6.

He shall furnish his photo ID proof and
local address proof document before the
court and photo ID proof of his sureties.

7.

He shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

8.

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

with
I.O
for
[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 13th day of March 2024)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.

9
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.2323/2024