BENGALURU – A Special Court in Bengaluru has granted bail to 28-year-old Malaya Mallik, who was arrested by the Excise Police for allegedly transporting 2 kilograms of dry ganja. The court, presided over by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS, delivered the order on September 19, 2022, observing that the quantity of the drug seized fell into the “intermediate” category and not the “commercial” threshold.
Background of the Excise Raid and Arrest
The case against Malaya Mallik, a resident of Doddakannalli and a native of Odisha, stems from an operation conducted by the Excise Police, BTM Range, on August 29, 2022. Acting on credible information provided by the Joint Commissioner of Excise, the Excise Inspector and his team mounted surveillance on Bannerghatta Road.
According to the prosecution, the police intercepted a two-wheeler traveling from Hulimavu toward BTM Layout. Upon questioning the rider, identified as Malaya Mallik, the police searched a bag he was carrying and discovered a brown cover containing a substance with a pungent smell, later identified as dry ganja with seeds and flowers. A digital weighing machine confirmed the weight of the contraband as 2 kilograms. The police seized the drug, the vehicle, and arrested Mallik, registering the case under various sections of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
Legal Arguments: Defense Claims vs. Prosecution Objections
The counsel for the petitioner, Sri Shivanna, argued that Malaya Mallik is a law-abiding citizen with no prior criminal record who had been falsely implicated. The defense contended that the mandatory procedures under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which governs the conditions for personal search, were not followed. Furthermore, they emphasized that the quantity seized was not a “commercial quantity,” thereby making the stringent bail restrictions under Section 37 inapplicable.
The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea, characterizing the accused as a “habitual drug dealer” and arguing that the offence carries a potential sentence of up to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment. The state expressed concerns that if released, the petitioner might abscond to his home state of Odisha or tamper with the ongoing investigation.
Judicial Analysis of “Intermediate Quantity”
In its analysis, the court focused on the specific weight of the seized contraband relative to the statutory definitions provided by the Ministry of Finance. According to the notification dated October 19, 2001, the weight limits for ganja are as follows:
- Small Quantity: Up to 1,000 grams (1 kg).
- Commercial Quantity: 20 kilograms and above.
The court noted that the 2 kilograms seized in this case qualifies as an “intermediate quantity.” Judge B.S. Jayashree cited the Supreme Court’s precedent in Birbal Prasad Vs. State of Bihar, noting that in cases involving non-commercial quantities where the accused has no prior record, a liberal approach to bail should be considered.
“When the quantity is less than commercial quantity, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not attract,” the Judge observed. “Factors become similar to bail petitions under regular statutes unless the prosecution points toward exceptional circumstances.”
Court Conditions and Final Order
The court found that since the incriminatory article had already been seized and the voluntary statement of the accused had been recorded, further custodial interrogation was unnecessary. To address the prosecution’s fears of the accused absconding, the court decided to impose stringent conditions rather than deny liberty.
The petition was allowed, and Malaya Mallik was ordered to be released on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of the same amount. The release is subject to the following conditions:
- The petitioner must report to the Investigating Officer on the first Monday of every month.
- He is prohibited from leaving the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
- He must cooperate with the ongoing investigation and attend all court hearing dates.
- He must not commit any similar offences while on bail.
- He must furnish photo ID and local address proof for himself and his sureties.
The court explicitly stated that any breach of these conditions would lead to the immediate cancellation of the bail. Following this order, the petitioner is expected to be released from judicial custody upon the completion of the bond formalities.