The XXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS) in Bengaluru has granted regular bail to Ananth Kumar (32), who was arrested by the Bengaluru City Railway Police with 9 kilograms and 350 grams of Ganja. The court’s decision, pronounced by Judge Sri. G. Raghavendra on September 11, 2023, was based on the critical finding that the seized quantity of the narcotic substance fell into the Intermediate Quantity category, thereby neutralizing the stringent anti-bail restrictions under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

The petitioner, Ananth Kumar, S/o Govindaraju, was the sole accused (Accused No. 1) in Crime No. 59/2023, booked for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.

Details of the Arrest and Seizure

The case originated from an intelligence report on August 18, 2023.

The Incident

• Information Source: Sri. Vijaykumar, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police (ASI) and member of the NDPS Detection Squad, informed the Police Sub Inspector (PSI), Sri. M.D. Purushotham, about observing Ganja transporters.
• Location of Apprehension: The ASI and a constable were observing the Prashanti Express train after it arrived at the Bangalore City Railway Station at 11:07 a.m. They saw a person (the petitioner) sitting on a stone bench near the general coach, looking around suspiciously with a trolley bag.
• Initial Inquiry: On suspicion, the ASI enquired about the trolley bag’s contents. The person confessed that the bag contained Ganja.
• Formal Seizure: After receiving permission from higher officers, the PSI arrived with panchas, staff, and necessary materials. The accused stated he purchased the Ganja from a village near Bhubaneswar and transported it by train. The PSI informed the accused of his right to have the seizure conducted by a Gazetted Officer, but the accused consented to the PSI proceeding.
• Contraband Recovered: The accused produced two bundles from the trolley bag. The first bundle weighed 4 kg 150 grams, and the second weighed 5 kg 200 grams, totaling 9 kgs 350 grams of Ganja.
• Case Registration: The Ganja was seized under a mahazar, and a complaint was lodged, leading to the registration of FIR under Crime No. 59/2023.

Legal Analysis: Quantity Classification and Bail

The core of the court’s deliberation revolved around whether the quantity seized (9 kgs 350 grams) qualified as a “commercial quantity,” which would trigger the rigorous conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Statutory Quantification

The court referred to the Central Government Notification S.O. 1055(E) dated 19.10.2021 (Serial No. 55) for the specification of quantities for Ganja:

• Small Quantity: 1,000 grams (1 kg)
• Commercial Quantity: 20 kg

Since the recovered quantity of 9 kgs 350 grams falls squarely between the small and commercial quantity thresholds, the court correctly classified it as an Intermediate Quantity.

Applicability of Section 37

Section 37 of the NDPS Act imposes two mandatory additional preconditions for bail, which must be satisfied by the accused, particularly in cases involving a commercial quantity:

1. The court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offences.
2. The court must be satisfied that the accused is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

The court emphasized that these strict conditions under Section 37 are applicable only to offences punishable under Section 19, Section 24, Section 27A, and offences involving commercial quantity. As the quantity recovered in this case was intermediate, the court determined that the constraints of Section 37 did not apply.

Decision based on Cr.P.C. Provisions

With the NDPS restrictions set aside, the court evaluated the bail petition primarily under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), specifically Section 437(1)(ii) and Section 437(3).

• Nature of Offence: The offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) is punishable with rigorous imprisonment which may extend up to 10 years, and it is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
• Prosecution’s Objection: The prosecution’s objections—that the accused might commit similar offences, tamper with witnesses, or fail to appear—were addressed by the court. The court noted that the prosecution did not object on the grounds of the accused being involved in similar or other cases previously.
• Mitigation through Conditions: The court ultimately held that the prosecution’s objections could be fully met by imposing appropriate conditions, as specified under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

Finding: The court concluded that the petitioner was able to satisfy that there were reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of the alleged offence (a standard that is lower than the one required under Section 37), and thus answered Point No. 1 in the affirmative.

Order and Bail Conditions

The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was allowed, and the petitioner, Ananth Kumar, was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand), along with one surety for the like sum.

The bail is subject to the following conditions:

1. No Inducement or Threat: The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
2. Cooperation: The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer (I.O.) for investigation.
3. Aadhaar Card: The petitioner shall produce his Aadhaar Card before the court.
4. Court Appearance: The petitioner shall regularly appear before the court on all hearing dates.
5. No Similar Offences: The petitioner shall not commit any offences similar to the offences of which he is accused or any other offences.
6. Cancellation Clause: Breach of any of the conditions would entail the cancellation of bail automatically.