The Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in Bengaluru has granted bail to 19-year-old Ruman Alam, who was arrested in connection with the alleged possession and sale of cannabis, commonly known as ganja. The court, presided over by Special Judge Smt. B.S. Jayashree, ruled that since the quantity of the seized contraband fell under the “intermediate” category rather than “commercial,” the stringent restrictions on bail typically associated with drug cases were not applicable.

The petitioner, Ruman Alam, a native of Bihar residing in Hosakote Taluq, was identified as Accused Number 3 in the case registered by the V.V. Puram Police Station under Crime Number 99/2022. The proceedings were initiated following a raid conducted in July 2022.

Case Background and Police Action

The criminal investigation was set in motion on July 27, 2022, following a tip-off received by the Assistant Sub-Inspector of the V.V. Puram Police Station. The credible information suggested that individuals were attempting to sell illegal substances on the service road near a local water tank.

After obtaining the necessary permissions from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, a raiding team mounted surveillance at the spot. At approximately 2:30 pm, police observed two individuals acting suspiciously and showing a bag to members of the public. Upon apprehending the suspects, the police discovered a bag containing 8 kilograms and 190 grams of ganja. The police subsequently seized the contraband, along with mobile phones, and registered a case under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Arguments from the Defense and Prosecution

The counsel representing Ruman Alam argued that the teenager was innocent and had been falsely implicated by the police. The defense contended that Alam was unaware of the contents of the bag and that the police had failed to follow the mandatory procedural safeguards outlined in Sections 41, 42, 50, and 52 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Furthermore, the defense emphasized that the seized quantity did not meet the “commercial” threshold and that the petitioner had no prior criminal record.

Conversely, the Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application. The prosecution argued that 8.19 kilograms of ganja represents a significant amount and that the offences carry a potential sentence of rigorous imprisonment for up to 20 years. They characterized the accused as a habitual dealer and expressed concerns that his release would lead to the tampering of evidence or his disappearance before the trial.

Judicial Analysis of Contraband Quantity

A central point of the court’s decision rested on the specific weight of the drugs seized. Under the Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Notification dated October 19, 2001, the thresholds for ganja are clearly defined: 1,000 grams (1 kilogram) is considered a “small quantity,” while 20 kilograms or more is considered a “commercial quantity.”

Judge B.S. Jayashree noted that the 8.19 kilograms involved in this case falls squarely into the “intermediate quantity” category. The court cited the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Birbal Prasad Vs. State of Bihar (2018), where it was held that for non-commercial quantities, the accused should generally be released on bail pending trial, provided they are not involved in other criminal activities.

The court observed that because the quantity was not “commercial,” the “rigors of Section 37” of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act—which requires the court to be satisfied that the accused is not guilty before granting bail—did not apply. Instead, the petition could be considered under the standard principles of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Conclusion and Bail Conditions

The court found that the major portion of the investigation was complete and the contraband had already been secured. Given that the offence is not punishable by death or life imprisonment, and the petitioner provided a permanent address, the judge concluded that any flight risk could be managed through strict conditions.

Ruman Alam was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond for a sum of 1,00,000 Rupees with two sureties of the same amount. The following conditions were imposed:

1. The petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer once a month, specifically on the first Monday, until the charge sheet is filed.
2. He is prohibited from leaving the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
3. He must not tamper with prosecution witnesses or abscond.
4. He must cooperate fully with the Investigating Officer for the remainder of the investigation.
5. He is strictly prohibited from committing any similar offences while on bail.
6. He must furnish proof of his photo identification and that of his sureties.
7. He must appear before the court on all hearing dates.

The order concluded with a warning that any breach of these conditions would lead to the immediate cancellation of his bail.