BENGALURU – The Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) in Bengaluru has granted bail to 29-year-old Mohammed Ikramulla, who was arrested by the Vyalikaval Police for alleged possession of ganja. The order, delivered by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), on November 22, 2022, emphasizes that the quantity seized does not meet the “commercial” threshold under the law.
Case Background and Prosecution Allegations
The case against Mohammed Ikramulla, a resident of Govindapura, originated from a police raid conducted on November 5, 2022. According to the prosecution, the Sub-Inspector of Police at Vyalikaval received credible information at approximately 12:00 PM regarding an individual selling prohibited narcotics near the LPO Ground on 1st Main Road, Vyalikaval.
Acting on the tip, the police team mounted surveillance and apprehended the suspect at approximately 12:30 PM. Upon searching the bag in the suspect’s possession, the police allegedly found a leaf-like substance. A field test confirmed the substance to be ganja. The total weight of the seized contraband was recorded as 1 kilogram and 50 grams. Following the seizure, a case was registered under Crime No. 132/2022 for offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.
Legal Arguments for and Against Bail
The petitioner’s counsel, Sri Kiran Kumar M., argued that Ikramulla is a law-abiding citizen who has been falsely implicated by the police. The defense contended that no contraband was found on the petitioner’s person during the personal search conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, and that the alleged seizure from the bag was a plant. Furthermore, the defense highlighted that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and has no criminal antecedents.
The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail plea, characterizing the accused as a habitual dealer whose release might hamper the investigation. The prosecution argued that the quantity seized was significant enough to warrant continued detention and that there was a risk of the petitioner absconding.
Intermediate vs. Commercial Quantity: The Judicial Turning Point
The core of the court’s reasoning relied on the classification of the seized substance under the NDPS Act. According to the Ministry of Finance notification dated October 19, 2001, the weight limits for ganja are strictly defined to determine the severity of the offence:
- Small Quantity: Up to 1,000 grams (1 kg).
- Commercial Quantity: 20 kilograms and above.
In this instance, the seizure of 1.05 kg of ganja slightly exceeds the “small quantity” limit but falls significantly short of the 20 kg “commercial quantity” mark. The court classified this as an “intermediate quantity.”
Judge B.S. Jayashree cited the Supreme Court precedent in Birbal Prasad Vs. State of Bihar, noting that for non-commercial quantities, the stringent rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act—which makes bail nearly impossible to obtain—do not apply. In such cases, the court follows regular bail principles where the burden on the accused to prove innocence at the bail stage is significantly lower.
The Court’s Reasoning and Final Decision
The court observed that the primary investigation was largely complete as the contraband had already been seized and the petitioner’s voluntary statement recorded. The judge noted that custodial interrogation was no longer warranted.
“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,” the court noted. To address the prosecution’s concerns regarding the accused fleeing, the court decided that stringent conditions would suffice.
Terms of the Bail
The court allowed the petition and ordered the release of Mohammed Ikramulla on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of the same amount. The bail is subject to several conditions:
- The petitioner must mark his attendance before the Investigating Officer once a month, preferably on the first Monday.
- He is prohibited from leaving the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
- He must not tamper with witnesses or commit similar offences while on bail.
- He must furnish photo ID and local address proof for himself and his sureties.
- He must appear before the court on all hearing dates.
The court warned that any breach of these conditions would lead to the immediate cancellation of his bail. Following the completion of bond formalities, the petitioner is expected to be released from judicial custody.