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 12th DAY OF DECEMBER 2022
Crl.Misc.No.11865/2022
Petitioner :
(accused No.5)
Karthik @ Kabali, S/o.Velu, a/a 30
years, R/at No.3297, 5th Cross, C
Block, Gayathrinagar,
Subramanyanagar, Bengaluru
(By Sri.Manjunath.H.S. Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Sheshadripuram 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.33/2020 of
Sheshadripuram PS., registered for the offence punishable
U/Sec.20(b) of NDPS Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioner for grant of bail
are as under:
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 no knowledge of alleged crime
and falsely implanted at the instance of extraneous
elements. The complainant has not seized any contraband
from the possession of the petitioner. He is the only earning
member of his family. The mandatory provisions U/s.50 of
NDPS Act has not been complied.

There are no eye
witnesses who speak about the sale of alleged contraband.
Though the alleged offence is non bailable, but is neither
punishable with imprisonment for life or death sentence.
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. He has no bad antecedents. He is the sole
bread earner of his family. Hence, sought to grant bail.

3. The objection raised by the prosecution is that the
investigating agency has in all seized 6 Kgs 500 grams of
Ganja from the possession of the accused. The accused is
found to be in possession of narcotic substance. A detailed
mahazar is drawn in the spot.

Personal search is
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11865/2022
3
conducted. The offence alleged against the petitioner is
punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which
shall extend upto 10 years. There is a primafacie case
available against the petitioner.
dealer.

He is an habitual drug
In the event of grant of bail, he would abscond and
may hamper the investigation. Hence, sought to reject the
bail plea of 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:
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:­ The PI of Sheshadripuram PS., has
put the criminal law into motion. The gist of the allegation
reads as here under:­
4
that on 18.3.2020 at about 9.30 am., the complainant
has received credible information that two persons are
selling ganja in Honda Activa bearing No.KA 02 GX 1212
inside the BBMP ground, near Seshadripuram swimming
pool behind Sai Baba temple. Immediately on receipt of the
information he has entered the same in the station house
diary and has also informed the matter to higher officer, he
has secured panchas. He along with panchas and staff had
been to the spot at 10.45 am., and mounted surveillance in
the spot. Two persons came there in their Activa Honda
Vehicle carrying a bag. They were surrounded and enquiry.
On inquiring them they have revealed their names as
Deepak V K, S/o.Velu, Sunilkumar, S/0.Dhanashekar. They
were carrying a bag in their scooter and also one hand bag.
When they were questioned about the contents of the bag
they have stated that it is containing ganja.

On further
enquiry accused No.2 has stated that he has purchased
ganja from Karthik @ Kabali.

They have also stated that
they have purchased ganja from one Appu, Jayaganesh and
Karthik. After purchase they are selling it to the customers
for higher price. The ganja which was found in the bag of
5
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11865/2022
accused Nos.1 and 2 was weighed. The weight came around
6 Kgs., 500 grams. A detail mahazar is drawn in the spot. A
detail report is submitted before the station house officer
which is the basis to register the case against the accused in
Cr.No.33/2020 of Sheshadripuram
PS., registered for the
offence punishable U/Sec.20(b) of NDPS Act.

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 Sec.41,
42, 50, 52 and 47 of the Act 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 6 Kgs 500 grams of ganja is
seized from the petitioner and other accused. The offence
punishable with imprisonment upto 10 years and with fine.
There are prima­facie material available against them.

6
10. On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
18.3.2020
apprehended
complainant
accused.

has
On
conducted
looking
to
raid
the
and
seizure
panchanama the drugs seized from accused Nos.1 and 2 is
weighing 6 Kgs 500 grams of Ganja. 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.55 the narcotic drug­ganja 1000 grams
is small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial quantity. In
this case the quantum of ganja seized is 6 Kgs 500 grams
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 – Bail – grant of – non commercial quantity
– quantity involved being only 14 Kgs., of ganja, which is
a non commercial quantity appellant accused not involved
in any other case – in above circumstances, held,
appellant should be released on bail, pending trial –
hence, directions issued to release appellant on bail, on
certain conditions.

7
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11865/2022
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
Ganja
6 Kgs 500 grams of
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.

In the instant case accused N os.1 and 2 were
apprehended with 6 Kgs., 500 grams of ganja by the
investigating agency.

They have stated that they have
purchased ganja from the present petitioner and other
accused. Though the petitioner herein is interrogated by the
investigating agency, no incriminatory material is connected
from the present petitioner. The final report is filed in the
case.

The allegation against the present petitioner is the
8
accused Nos.1 and 2 had purchased ganja from him but the
details of purchase of ganja, transfer of money towards said
purchase is not collected by the investigating agency.

A
bald allegation is made that the petitioner herein had
supplied ganja, on what date he had supplied, from where
he had procured, what is the amount he has collected there
is no material. 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 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
executing
personal
is
enlarged
bond
for
on
a
bail
on
sum
of
9
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11865/2022
Rs.1,00,000/­ with One surety for the like sum
with following conditions.
1.

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

2.

He shall not tamper the witness or abscond.

3.

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

4.

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

5.

He shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

6.

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

[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 12th day of December 2022)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*