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 by Raunak Singh (Accused No. 2). The case, registered by the Sadashivanagar Police Station under Crime No. 115/2022, involves offences punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. The order reaffirms established legal principles regarding intermediate contraband quantities, confirming that non-commercial quantities do not attract the strict bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Background of the Case

The criminal proceedings commenced on July 5, 2022, when the Police Sub-Inspector (PSI) of Sadashivanagar Police Station received credible information at around 5:40 PM. The report indicated that two unknown individuals were selling narcotic substances (ganja) from a red college bag near Ramana Maharshi Park, Achayya Shetty Layout, Sadashivanagar, Bengaluru.

After notifying superior officers and securing permission, the police team, accompanied by independent witnesses (panchas), arrived at the spot at 6:30 PM and apprehended the suspects. Upon questioning, the individuals disclosed their identities, with the petitioner identified as Raunak Singh, aged 21, residing in Pandri Govind Nagar, Raipur district, Chhattisgarh.

A search of the red bag resulted in the recovery and seizure of 2 kilograms and 280 grams of ganja. The contraband was seized under a spot seizure panchanama, and Crime No. 115/2022 was registered under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act. The petitioner was arrested, produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate, and remanded to judicial custody.

Contentions of the Petitioner

Represented by advocate Sri S.S., Raunak Singh filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) urging the following grounds:

• Innocence and False Implication: The petitioner asserted that he was an innocent, law-abiding citizen with no knowledge of the alleged crime and had been falsely implicated at the instance of extraneous elements.
• Procedural Non-Compliance: It was contended that mandatory statutory safeguards 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 2.28 kg of ganja fell well below the commercial threshold.
• No Bad Antecedents: The petitioner stated that he had no bad antecedents and was the sole breadwinner for his family.
• Willingness to Comply: Being a resident with deep family roots, he expressed full readiness to offer sureties and abide by any conditions imposed by the court to secure his release.

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 2.28 kg of ganja directly from the physical possession of the accused following a personal search and 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: Alleging that the petitioner was a habitual drug dealer, the prosecution argued that granting bail would risk him absconding and hampering the ongoing investigation.

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 2 kg 280 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 petitioner’s voluntary statement 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.6816/2022 on July 14, 2022, ordering the release of Raunak Singh on regular bail.

Key Conditions Imposed:

1. Personal Bond: The petitioner must execute a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum.
2. Police Station Attendance: He 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: He shall not leave the court’s jurisdiction without prior permission.
4. Non-Interference: He must not tamper with prosecution witnesses or abscond.
5. Investigation Cooperation: He must fully cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the investigation.
6. No Re-Offending: He shall not commit similar offences or any crime while on bail.
7. Identity Verification: He must furnish photo ID proof and local address proof documents for himself and his sureties.
8. Court Appearance: He 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.