IN THE COURT OF THE XXXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE & SPL. JUDGE (NDPS), BENGALURU.
CCH.33.
PRESENT:
SMT. B.S. JAYASHREE, LL.M.,
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE (NDPS),
BENGALURU.
DATED: THIS THE 23rd DAY OF AUGUST 2023
Crl.Misc.No.7937/2023
Petitioner :
(accused No.1)
Adarsh S/o Bhaskaran,
Aged 23 Years, R/at Kunjan House,
Mangadevru Village, Parasinakadavu
Post, Kannor District, Kerala.
(By Sri B Venugopala Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Parappana Agrahara PS
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the
petitioner to enlarge him on bail, in Cr.No.336/2023 of
Parappana Agrahara PS registered for the offence punishable
U/Sec.21A, 22(A) of NDPS Act.
2. The prevalent grounds urged seeking bail:-
2
That the petitioner is very innocent and law abiding
citizen.

He has not committed any offence much less the
offence as alleged.

He has been falsely implicated by the
respondent in this case.

Though the alleged offence is non
bailable, but is neither punishable with imprisonment for life
or death sentence. The procedure contemplated under N.D.P.S.
Act not followed while recovery. The contraband seized is not
commercial quantity. The petitioner is permanent resident of
the address shown in the cause title. The petitioner is ready
and willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this court in
the event of grant of bail. He is ready to offer surety for his due
appearance before this court. Hence, sought to grant bail.

3. The prosecution while opposing the bail petition
contended that the I.O has seized 4 grams of MDMA. There are
sufficient material available against the petitioner, and the said
offences are punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term
which shall not be less than 10 years which may extend to 20
years and shall also be liable to fine.

The investigation is
pending. In the event of his release he may tamper with the
3
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7937/2023
prosecution witnesses. Incriminatory articles were seized from
his custody.

He may involve himself in similar offences.

Investigating agency by complying the provisions prevailed
under the act has seized the contraband from the petitioner.
The petitioner herein would sell the drugs to the younger
generation which may ruin the career of younger generation.
With these specific pleas sought to reject the bail plea of the
petitioner.

4. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the
records.
5. The points that arise for my consideration are as here
under:
1. Whether petitioner has made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge him on
bail?
2. What order?
6. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
4
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:- The PSI, of Parappana Agrahara
PS.,
Bangalore has presented the complaint before the SHO. The
gist of the allegation reads as here under:On 01.08.2023 at 01.00 pm., when the complainant was
in the station he has received credible information from the
informer that a person is selling contraband to the public near
Dayanada Sagara Collage, Kudlu gate, Bengaluru. Immediately
after receipt of the information he has informed the matter to
his superior officer, obtained permission to conduct raid. He
along with panchas and staff went to the spot and found two
persons. One person is standing by the side of the road and
another one is trying to sell some article to the public. The
informant had identified the said person, he was surrounded
and another person who was standing by the side of the road
was also surrounded and apprehended. On enquiry they have
revealed their names as Adarsh, s/o.Bhaskaran and Azad
native of Kerala State.

In the presence of gazetted officer
personal search is conducted.

On personal search of the
accused No.1 they found MDMA. On weighing the same the
5
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7937/2023
weight came around 4 grams of MDMA. During [personal
search of accused No.2 no contraband is found.

A detail
mahazar is drawn and incriminatory MDMA is seized.

The
accused was arrested and a detail report is submitted. Based
on the said report a case is registered in Cr.No.336/2023 for
the offence punishable U/Sec. 21A, 22(A) of NDPS Act.
Thereafter
the accused were produced before the court and
remanded to judicial custody. Present petitioner is accused
No.1 in the case.

8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner that
he is planted in the case by the complainant police he is
unaware of seized drug. The seized article is not commercial
quantity. The mandatory provisions of search and seizure are
not complied. He is permanent residents of the address given
in the cause title. In the event of grant of bail he is ready to
abide by the conditions which are being imposed by this court.

9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioner has
committed heinous offence 4 grams of MDMA is seized from
the petitioner. The offence punishable with imprisonment upto
6
10 years and with fine. There are prima-facie material available
against them.

10.

On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
01.08.2023 complainant has conducted raid and apprehended
accused. On looking to the seizure panchanama the drugs
seized from petitioner herein is weighing 4 grams of MDMA. As
per specification of small and commercial quantity of narcotic
drug or psychotropic substance issued by Ministry of Finance
Department
of
Revenue
Notification
S.O.1055(E)
dated
19.10.2001 at Sl.No.134 the narcotic drug-MDMA 0.5 grams is
small quantity and 10 Grams., is commercial quantity. In this
case the quantum of ganja seized is 4 grams of MDMA is an
intermediate quantity. As per the decision of Hon’ble Apex
Court reported in 2018 11 SCC 488 Birbal Prasad Vs.,
State of Bihar wherein it is held that:
Ss.37 and 20 Ц Bail Ц grant of Ц non commercial quantity Ц
quantity involved being only 14 Kgs., of ganja, which is a
non commercial quantity appellant accused not involved in
any other case Ц in above circumstances, held, appellant
should be released on bail, pending trial Ц hence, directions
issued to release appellant on bail, on certain conditions.

CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7937/2023
7
The said case law aptly applies to the case on hand in holding
that the contraband seized in the case on hand is intermediate
quantity and it is not commercial quantity.

In the said
circumstances, as per the observations of Hon’ble Apex Court
the bail plea of accused to be considered.

11. Here in this case the drugs seized by the investigating
agency to the tune of 4 grams of MDMA which is an
intermediate
quantity.

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 normal, unless the prosecution points towards
exceptional circumstances.

12. The major portion of the investigation is concluded.
The offence alleged against the petitioner is not punishable
with
death
or imprisonment for life.

Further custodial
interrogation is not warranted. As per the information provided
by the petitioner he is permanently residing in the address
shown in the cause title. The apprehension of the prosecution
that he may abscond and may protract the trial could be
8
compensated by imposing stringent conditions. In the result, I
answer the point for consideration in the affirmative.
13. Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.439 of
Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two
sureties for the like sum with following conditions.
1.

The petitioner shall give attendance before
the concerned I.O., once in a month i.e.,
preferably on first Monday of every month in
between 10.00 am., to 2.00 pm., till filing of
charge sheet or further orders whichever is
earlier.

2.

He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this
court without prior permission.

3.

He shall not tamper the witness or abscond.

4.

He
shall
co-operate
investigation.

5.

He shall not commit similar offence or
any offence while on bail.

6.

He shall furnish his photo ID proof and
local address proof document before the
court and photo ID proof of his sureties.

7.

He shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

8.

Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioner would entail cancellation of bail.

with
I.O
for
9
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.7937/2023
[Dictated to the stenographer, directly on the computer, typed and
computerised by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in
Open Court on this the 23rd day of August 2023)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*