The XXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) in Bengaluru has granted bail to 24-year-old Saqeeb Ahmed in connection with a drug peddling case registered by the R.T. Nagar Police. The order, delivered on April 5, 2024, by Judge Sri. G. Raghavendra, underscores the legal distinction between “commercial” and “intermediate” quantities under Indian narcotics laws.
The petitioner, Saqeeb Ahmed, a resident of Sarayipalya, Thanisandra, was arrested in March 2024 following a police raid. He was charged under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which pertains to the punishment for contravention in relation to the cannabis plant and cannabis.
Background of the Arrest and Police Raid
According to the prosecution’s case, the incident unfolded on March 24, 2024. At approximately 3:00 p.m., Sri. Prathap R, a Police Sub-Inspector (PSI) at the R.T. Nagar Police Station, received credible information from an informer regarding a person selling ganja (cannabis) in a vacant ground in Matadahalli.
Following the receipt of this information, the PSI obtained the necessary written permission from the Assistant Commissioner of Police to conduct a raid. To ensure the legality of the process, independent witnesses (panchas) were summoned to the station. The police team, including the PSI and various staff members, reached the spot at 3:45 p.m.
To confirm the illicit activity, the police employed a “decoy” strategy. One staff member, Sri. Chethan, was sent ahead to verify if the suspect was indeed selling drugs. Once the information was confirmed, the team conducted a raid and detained the individual, who was later identified as Saqeeb Ahmed. Upon searching him, the police seized 1 kilogram and 100 grams of ganja, along with a weighing machine, plastic covers, and a bag.
Legal Arguments and Classification of Narcotics
Representing the accused, Advocate Vidyasagar Surpur argued that Saqeeb Ahmed was innocent and had been falsely implicated. A primary pillar of the defense was that the quantity of ganja recovered was not a “commercial quantity” but rather an “intermediate quantity.”
The court examined the Central Government notification SO 1055 (E) dated October 19, 2001, which classifies drug quantities. For ganja (cannabis):
- Small Quantity: Up to 1,000 grams (1 kg).
- Commercial Quantity: 20 kilograms or more.
Since the seizure involved 1.1 kilograms, it was classified as an “intermediate quantity.” This distinction is critical because Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, places much more stringent restrictions on bail for commercial quantities. For intermediate quantities, the court has broader discretion to grant bail under the general principles of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The Court’s Reasoning
Judge G. Raghavendra observed that the offence alleged under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act—dealing with intermediate quantities—carries a punishment of rigorous imprisonment for up to 10 years, but it is not punishable by death or life imprisonment.
The court further noted that the limitations on granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act (which requires the court to be satisfied that the accused is likely not guilty) are primarily applicable to offences involving commercial quantities or specific sections like Section 19 (embezzlement by cultivators), Section 24 (external dealings), or Section 27A (financing illicit traffic).
The judge referred to Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This section outlines when bail may be taken in cases of non-bailable offences. It specifies that bail should generally be granted unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the person is guilty of an offence punishable by death or life imprisonment, or if they have certain prior convictions.
Final Decision and Bail Conditions
The court concluded that the objections raised by the Public Prosecutor—including concerns that the accused might commit similar offences or flee from justice—could be mitigated by imposing strict conditions.
Allowing the petition, the court ordered the release of Saqeeb Ahmed on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000, along with one surety of the like sum. The bail is subject to the following conditions:
- The accused shall not threaten or induce any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
- The accused must cooperate fully with the Investigation Officer.
- The accused must appear regularly before the court for all proceedings.
- The accused must produce a copy of his Aadhaar card for identification purposes.
- The accused must not commit any similar offences while out on bail.
The court warned that any breach of these conditions would lead to the immediate cancellation of the bail. With the filing of this order, the petitioner is expected to be released from custody pending further trial.