The XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge in Bengaluru has granted bail to 25-year-old Mohammad Jahid, who was arrested by the Hebbal Police in connection with the seizure of MDMA. The court, presided over by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, delivered the order on August 23, 2022, noting that the quantity of drugs seized fell below the threshold for “commercial quantity” under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Background of the Hebbal Police Raid

The case originated on July 31, 2022, when the Police Inspector of Hebbal Police Station received credible information regarding the illegal sale of narcotics. According to the prosecution, the information suggested that a person was selling MDMA near the Govindappa Garden railway track in Hebbal.

After obtaining the necessary permissions from the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), a raiding team was formed. Upon reaching the spot, the police apprehended a suspect, later identified as Mohammad Jahid. During a personal search, officers reportedly discovered 8 grams of MDMA in his possession. Following the seizure, the police registered a case under Crime No. 138/2022 for offences punishable under Section 22(B) of the NDPS Act.

Arguments for the Petitioner

The legal counsel representing Mohammad Jahid argued that the petitioner was a law-abiding citizen with no criminal antecedents. The defense contended that the petitioner had been falsely implicated and that the mandatory procedural requirements for search and recovery under the NDPS Act—specifically Sections 41, 42, and 50—were not strictly followed.

The defense emphasized that the quantity seized was not a “commercial quantity,” which significantly impacts the severity of the legal restrictions regarding bail. They further stated that the petitioner was a permanent resident of Bangalore and was willing to abide by any stringent conditions imposed by the court to secure his release.

Prosecution’s Opposition

The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail petition, asserting that MDMA is a dangerous synthetic drug that ruins the lives of the younger generation. The state argued that 8 grams of MDMA is a significant amount and that Jahid was a “habitual drug dealer.” The prosecution expressed concerns that if released on bail, the accused might continue the illegal trade, abscond from the law, or tamper with the prosecution’s evidence.

The Court’s Rationale: Intermediate vs. Commercial Quantity

The court’s decision hinged primarily on the classification of the seized drug. According to the Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Notification, the “commercial quantity” for MDMA is defined as 10 grams or more.

The judge observed that since the police seized 8 grams, it falls under the “intermediate quantity” category. Judge B.S. Jayashree cited the Supreme Court decision in Birbal Prasad vs. State of Bihar (2018), which noted that when the quantity involved is non-commercial, the strict rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act—which make bail nearly impossible—do not apply.

“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 statutes,” the court noted.

Conditions of Release

The judge found that the major portion of the investigation was complete as the contraband had already been seized. Furthermore, the offence was not punishable by death or life imprisonment. To balance the interests of the state with the rights of the accused, the court allowed the bail petition subject to the following conditions:

• The petitioner must execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of the same amount.
• He must mark his attendance before the Investigating Officer once a month (on the first Monday) until the charge sheet is filed.
• He is prohibited from leaving the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
• He must not tamper with witnesses or commit any similar offences while on bail.
• He must provide valid photo ID and residential proof for himself and his sureties.

Failure to comply with any of these conditions would entitle the state to seek a cancellation of the bail.