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 19th DAY OF August 2022
Crl. Misc.No.7387/2022
petitioners :
(accused No.1 to 4)
1. Litu Kudei, S/o Late Pooda,
Aged about 20 years, Dreseru Village,
Pahiraju Panchayathi, Kandamalu
District, Kalahandi, Orissa.
2. Madhaba Digial, Aged about 22
years, R/at. No. 09, Dreseru Village,
Pahairaju Panchayathi, Kandamalu
District, Kalahandi, Orissa.
3. Prahlada Kanhar, S/o Late
Lambhodhar, Aged about 20 years,
Silandi Village, Luising Panchayathi,
Kandamalu District, Kalahandi,
Orissa­766001.
4. Sidhanta Sahu, Aged about 19
years, Luisinge Panchayathi,
Kandamalu District, Kalahandi,
Orissa ­766001.

(By Sri. Nataraj .D. Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Hosakote PS.
(By Special Public Prosecutor)
2
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by
the petitioners to enlarge them on bail, in Cr.No.250/2022
of Hosakote PS., registered for the offence punishable
U/Sec.20(B), (ii) (b) of NDPS Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioners for grant of
bail are as under:
That the petitioners are innocent and law abiding
citizens. They have not committed any offence much less
the offence as alleged. They have been falsely implicated by
the respondent in this case. Though the alleged offences are
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
petitioners are permanent residents of the address shown in
the cause title. The petitioners are ready and willing to abide
by any conditions imposed by this court in the event of
grant of bail. They are ready to offer surety for their due
appearance before this court. Hence, sought to grant bail.

3
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.7387/2022
3. The prosecution while opposing the bail petition
contended that the I.O has seized 15 Kgs.,of ganja.

The
offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable with
rigorous imprisonment for a term upto 10 years and shall
also be liable to fine. There is a primafacie case available
against the petitioners. They are habitual drug dealers.
There is primafacie case made out against petitioners. If
petitioners are released on bail, they will continue the
profession of narcotic drug selling, and they may abscond
and tamper evidence of the prosecution. 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 petitioners have made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge them on
bail?
2. What order?
6. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
4
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:­ The complainant who is the PSI,
Hosakote PS., Bangalore has put the criminal law into
motion. The gist of the allegation reads as here under:­
On 18.07.2022 at 1215 pm., when the complainant
was in the station he has received information from an
informer that on Kolar Bangalore NH 75 service road, near
Syed Palace, Hosakote taluk 4 persons are selling drugs to
the customers.

On receipt of the information he has
informed to his higher officer, obtained permission and
thereafter, he along with his staff and panchas has been to
the spot and found two persons holding bags in their hands
and other two persons were talking to them. He has
surrounded the said persons and apprehended them.

On
search he has found 15 Kgs., of Ganja. A detail report was
prepared and submitted to PSI of Hosakote PS. Basing on
the said report the case in Cr.No.250/2022 registered for
the offences punishable U/Sec.20(B)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act. The
accused Nos.1 to 4 were arrested and produced before
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.7387/2022
5
jurisdictional Magistrate, they were remanded to JC.

The
present petitioners are accused No.1 to 4 in this case.
8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioners
that they are planted in the case by the complainant police
they are 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.

They are
permanent residents of the address given in the cause title.
In the event of grant of bail the are ready to abide by the
conditions which are being imposed by this court.
9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioners
have committed heinous offence 15 Kgs., of ganja is seized
from
the
petitioners.

The
offence
punishable
with
imprisonment upto 10 years and with fine. There is 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
18.07.2022 PSI of Hosakote PS., has conducted raid and
apprehended the petitioners. On looking to the seizure
panchanama the drugs seized is weighing 15 Kgs., of ganja.

6
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 15
Kgs., of ganja 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.

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 15 Kgs., of ganja which
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.7387/2022
7
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 investigation in the case is
concluded as the incriminatory article is already seized. The
offence alleged against the petitioners are not punishable
with death or imprisonment for life.

Further custodial
interrogation is not warranted. Their Voluntary statements
is already recorded. As per the information provided by the
petitioners they are permanently residing in the addresses
shown
in
the
cause
title.

The
apprehension
of
the
prosecution that they may abscond and may protract the
trial
could
conditions.

be
In
compensated
the
result,
I
by
imposing
answer
the
stringent
point
for
consideration in the affirmative.
13. Point No.2:­ In the result, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioners U/Sec.439
of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.

8
The petitioners are enlarged on bail on
executing
personal
bond
for
a
sum
of
Rs.1,00,000/­ each with two sureties for the like
sum with following conditions.
1.

The petitioners 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.

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

3.

They shall
abscond.

4.

They shall
investigation.

5.

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

6.

They shall furnish his photo ID proof and
local address proof document before the
court and photo ID proof of his sureties
7.

They shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

8.

Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioners, would entail cancellation of bail.

not
tamper
co­operate
the
with
witness
I.O
or
for
[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 19th day of August 2022)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.