In a notable judicial order delivered by the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS cases at Bengaluru, the court allowed the bail application filed jointly by Rakesh N.N. (Accused No. 1) and Kiran H.M. (Accused No. 2). The case, registered by the Govindraj Nagar Police Station under Crime No. 120/2022, involves offences punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. The ruling reinforces established legal principles regarding intermediate contraband quantities, confirming that non-commercial quantities do not trigger the strict statutory bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Background of the Case

The criminal proceedings commenced on June 29, 2022, when the Police Sub-Inspector (PSI) of Govindraj Nagar Police Station received credible information at around 3:15 PM (15.15 hours). An informant reported that unknown persons were selling ganja from a motorcycle on Patagarapalya Main Road, behind SHK Choultry, Bengaluru.

Upon obtaining necessary permissions from superior officers, the PSI along with police personnel and independent witnesses (panchas) conducted a raid at the location and intercepted two suspects. Upon questioning, they identified themselves as Rakesh N.N. (aged 22) and Kiran H.M. (aged 22), both residents of Egganahalli Cross, Bengaluru, with permanent roots in Donikana Village, Chikkamagaluru district.

A search of the bag in their possession led to the recovery and seizure of 1 kilogram and 250 grams of ganja. The contraband was seized under a spot seizure panchanama, and Crime No. 120/2022 was registered under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act. The petitioners were arrested, produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate, and remanded to judicial custody.

Contentions of the Petitioners

Represented by advocate Sri F.A., the petitioners filed a joint bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) urging the following grounds:

• Innocence and False Implication: The petitioners asserted that they were innocent, law-abiding citizens with no knowledge of the alleged crime, claiming they were falsely implicated by the police.
• Procedural Non-Compliance: It was contended that mandatory statutory provisions under Sections 41, 42, 50, 52, and 47 of the NDPS Act were not complied with during search and recovery operations.
• Intermediate Quantity Classification: The defense emphasized that the seized quantity of 1.25 kg of ganja fell well below the commercial threshold.
• Willingness to Comply: Being permanent residents with deep roots, they expressed full readiness to furnish reliable sureties and abide by any conditions imposed by the court.

Objections by the Prosecution

The prosecution, represented by the Public Prosecutor, strongly opposed the bail petition on the following grounds:

• Seizure of Contraband: The investigating agency seized 1.25 kg of ganja directly from the joint possession of the accused under a spot panchanama.
• Severity of Punishment: The alleged offence carries rigorous imprisonment for a term extending up to 10 years along with a fine.
• Risk of Flight and Re-offending: Alleging that the petitioners were habitual drug dealers, the prosecution argued that granting bail would risk them absconding, tampering with evidence, or resuming illicit drug sales.

Judicial Findings and Legal Analysis

The presiding judge, Smt. B.S. Jayashree, evaluated the prosecution records and centered the analysis on whether the contraband quantity triggered the strict bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Classification of Ganja Quantity

As per Notification S.O.1055(E) issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) on October 19, 2001 (Sl. No. 55):

• Small Quantity for Ganja: Up to 1,000 grams (1 kg).
• Commercial Quantity for Ganja: 20 kilograms or more.

The court observed that the total recovery of 1 kg 250 grams of ganja falls between 1 kg and 20 kg, placing it firmly in the intermediate quantity category.

Applicability of Precedents and Section 37 NDPS Act

The court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Birbal Prasad v. State of Bihar (2018 11 SCC 488), where the Apex Court granted bail for possession of 14 kg of ganja (a non-commercial quantity) in the absence of prior criminal records.

Applying this legal principle, Judge B.S. Jayashree observed:

1. When the quantity of contraband seized is less than commercial quantity, the strict rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply.
2. Factors governing bail revert to regular statutory considerations under the Cr.P.C. unless exceptional adverse circumstances are demonstrated by the prosecution.
3. The major portion of the investigation was complete as the incriminatory contraband had already been seized and the petitioners’ voluntary statements recorded.
4. The alleged offence does not carry penalties of death or life imprisonment, making further custodial interrogation unnecessary.
5. Prosecution fears regarding flight risk or trial delay can be adequately compensated by imposing stringent bail conditions.

Final Order and Terms of Bail

Answering Point No. 1 in the affirmative, the court allowed Crl.Misc.No.6622/2022 on July 15, 2022, ordering the release of Rakesh N.N. and Kiran H.M. on regular bail.

Key Conditions Imposed:

1. Personal Bond: Each petitioner must execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum.
2. Police Station Attendance: They must report before the Investigating Officer once a month (preferably on the first Monday) between 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM until the filing of the charge sheet or further orders.
3. Jurisdictional Restrictions: They shall not leave the court’s jurisdiction without prior permission.
4. Non-Interference: They shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses or abscond.
5. Investigation Cooperation: They must fully cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the investigation.
6. No Re-Offending: They shall not commit similar offences or any crime while on bail.
7. Identity Verification: They must furnish photo ID proof and local address proof documents for themselves and their sureties.
8. Court Appearance: They must appear before the court on all scheduled hearing dates.

The court explicitly noted that any breach of these conditions would entail immediate cancellation of the bail.