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 27 th DAY OF JUNE 2022
Crl.Misc.No.6073/2022
Petitioner :
(accused No.1 )
Kiran Kumar.N, S/o Late Narasing
Rao, aged about 31 years, R/at Tank
Pumpu Road, 2nd main, Adithya
Nagar, Chikkabettahalli, M.S Palya,
Bengaluru
(By Sri DR.G Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by SHO, Yeshwanthapura 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.183/2022 of SHO,
Yeshwanthapura PS., registered for the offence punishable
U/Sec.20(B) of NDPS Act.

2
2. The grounds urged by the petitioner for grant of bail
are as under:
That the petitioner is very innocent and law abiding
citizen.

He has not committed any offence much less the
offence as alleged. He has no knowledge of alleged crime and
falsely implanted at the instance of extraneous elements. The
mandatory provisions U/s.50 of NDPS Act has not been
complied.

There are no eye witnesses who speak about the
sale of alleged contraband. Though the alleged offence is non
bailable, but is neither punishable with imprisonment for life
or death sentence. 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. He has no bad antecedents. He is the sole
bread earner of his family. Hence, sought to grant bail.

3. The objection raised by the prosecution is that the
investigating agency has in all seized 1 Kgs., 590 grams of
ganja from the possession of the accused.

The accused is
found to be in possession of narcotic substance.

A detailed
3
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6073/2022
mahazar is drawn in the spot. Personal search is conducted.
The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable with
rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall extend upto 10
years. There is a primafacie case available against the
petitioner.

He is an habitual drug dealer.

In the event of
grant of bail, he would abscond and may hamper the
investigation. Hence, sought to reject the bail plea of 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:- A report submitted by PSI., who is the
complainant in this case before the SHO, Yeshwanthapura PS.
The contents of the report is as here under:On 01.06.2022 at about 9:00 AM., when the complainant
was in the station he has received credible information that a
person is selling ganja at a vacant place located at Jayarama
Colony, Yeshwanthapura, within the limits of respondent
police station. He has informed the Higher Officer and
obtained permission to conduct raid. He along with his staff
and panchas went to the spot. He has apprehended the
accused and on enquiry he has revealed his name and
address.

During personal search he has seized 1 Kg., 590
grams of ganja. Thereafter, a detail seizure panchanama was
drawn. A detail report was prepared and submitted before SHO
which is the basis to register the case against the accused in
Cr.No.183/2022 of SHO, Yeshwanthapura PS registered for the
offence punishable U/Sec.20(B) of NDPS Act.

Thereafter,
accused was arrested and produced before jurisdictional
Magistrate and remanded to JC.

5
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6073/2022
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 resident 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. The prosecution opposed the bail plea on the ground
that the offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable
upto 10 years.

In the event of grant of bail he is going to
abscond and may hamper investigation.

10.

On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record the investigating
agency seized 1 Kgs., 590 grams of ganja under the seizure
panchanama.

The petitioner is in judicial custody since the
date of his arrest i.e., from 01.06.2022.

On looking to the
seizure panchanama the drugs seized is weighing 1 Kgs., 590
6
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 drug­
ganja 1000 grams is small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial
quantity. In this case the quantum of ganja seized is 1 Kg.,
590 grams which 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.

CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6073/2022
7
11.

Here in this case the drugs seized by the
investigating agency to the tune of 1 Kg., 590 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 investigation in the case is
concluded as the incriminatory article is already seized. The
offence alleged against the petitioner is not punishable with
death or imprisonment for life. Further custodial interrogation
is not warranted. Voluntary statement of accused 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.

8
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.
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. 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 co-operate with I.O for 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 dates of
hearing.

9
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6073/2022
8. 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 27th day of June 2022]
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*