BENGALURU – In a significant ruling concerning the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, a Special NDPS Court in Bengaluru has granted bail to 22-year-old Koramani Adhikary. The decision, delivered by Hon’ble Judge Smt. B.S. Jayashree, emphasized the distinction between “commercial” and “intermediate” quantities of narcotics when considering the liberty of an accused individual.
The petitioner, Koramani Adhikary, a resident of Ganjam district in Odisha, had been in judicial custody following his arrest by the Cantonment Railway Police. The prosecution alleged that the accused was involved in the illegal trafficking of ganja through the railway network.
The Case Background and Seizure
The criminal proceedings began on August 8, 2022, when the Police Inspector of the Cantonment Railway Police Station received credible information regarding drug peddling on Platform No. 1 of the Cantonment Railway Station. Upon receiving permission from higher authorities, a police team conducted a raid at approximately 3:30 p.m.
According to the prosecution, the police observed a suspicious individual showing a bag to members of the public. Upon apprehending the individual, later identified as Koramani Adhikary, and inspecting the bag, the police discovered 4 kilograms and 100 grams of ganja. The contraband was seized under a detailed panchanama, and a case was registered under Crime No. 50/2022 for offenses punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.
Legal Arguments for Bail
The counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.K.V., argued that the 22-year-old was innocent and had been falsely implicated by the police. The defense contended that the mandatory procedures for search and seizure under Sections 41, 42, 50, and 52 of the NDPS Act were not strictly followed. Furthermore, the defense highlighted that Adhikary had no prior criminal antecedents and was a permanent resident of Odisha, willing to provide sureties for his appearance.
Crucially, the defense argued that the seized quantity of 4.1 kilograms of ganja did not constitute a “commercial quantity” under the law, which would have invoked much stricter bail restrictions.
Prosecution’s Opposition
The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail petition, asserting that the accused was caught red-handed with a significant amount of ganja. The prosecution argued that the offense carried a potential punishment of up to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and a heavy fine. Concerns were raised that if released, the petitioner might return to drug peddling, abscond from the law, or tamper with the evidence collected by the investigation team.
The Court’s Analysis of “Intermediate Quantity”
In its reasoning, the court examined the specific weights defined by the Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue. For ganja, 1,000 grams (1 kg) is considered a small quantity, while 20 kilograms is defined as a commercial quantity. The court determined that the 4.1 kilograms seized in this case falls squarely into the “intermediate quantity” category.
Judge Jayashree cited the landmark Supreme Court decision in Birbal Prasad vs. State of Bihar (2018), where the Apex Court granted bail in a case involving 14 kilograms of ganja because it was a non-commercial quantity.
The court observed that when a quantity is less than commercial, the “rigors of Section 37” of the NDPS Act—which essentially reverse the burden of proof for bail—do not apply. In such instances, the court treats the bail plea similarly to regular criminal statutes unless exceptional circumstances are proven by the prosecution.
The court noted that since the investigation was largely concluded and the contraband already seized, further custodial interrogation was unnecessary.
Conditions of the Bail Order
Granting the petition, the court ordered the release of Koramani Adhikary upon the execution of a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties. The bail is subject to several stringent conditions:
- Attendance: The petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer once a month (on the first Monday) until the charge sheet is filed.
- Jurisdictional Restrictions: He is not permitted to leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
- Conduct: He must not tamper with witnesses, abscond, or commit any similar offenses while on bail.
- Cooperation: He is mandated to cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
- Identification: He must provide photo ID proof for himself and his sureties.
The court warned that any breach of these conditions would lead to the immediate cancellation of the bail. This ruling highlights the judicial balance between the severity of drug-related offenses and the protection of individual liberty when the statutory thresholds for the most serious classifications are not met.