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 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022
Crl.Misc.No.8705/2022
Petitioner :
(accused )
Sri.Charan @ Charan Kumar,
S/o.Somappa
a/a 19 Yrs, R/at Medahalli,
Bidarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru East
Taluk
Permanent Resident of
Pulipapenahalli Village,
Mallanayakanahalli Hobli,
Kolar District.
(By Sri ATP., Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Avalahalli 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.329/2022 of
2
Avalahalli
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:
That the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the alleged
offences and have got valid and tenable defense. There is no
eye­witnesses to say that the accused was in actual physical
possession of the ganja. The petitioner hails from respectable
family and has no bad antecedents or he is a previous convict.
The petitioner is in judicial custody since the date of his arrest
and he is no more required as the investigation is already
completed. 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 1 Kg 250 Grams of ganja
from the possession of the accused persons. The accused is
3
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.8705/2022
found to be in possession of narcotic substance. A detailed
mahazar is drawn in the spot. Personal search is 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.

He is an habitual drug dealer.

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:
4
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:­ A report submitted by PSI, ., who is the
complainant in this case before the Avalahalli PS.

The
contents of the report is as here under:­
On 24.8.2022 at about 4.00 pm., when the PI., of
Avalahalli PS., was discharging duties he has received credible
information that two persons who are proceeding to Medahalli
from KR Puram in a two wheeler were carrying contraband
ganja. Immediately on receipt of information he has noted the
same in the station house diary, informed the matter to ACP.
He along with staff and panchas had been to the spot to
conduct raid.

When he had been to Medahalli, Karnashree
layout at road humps mounted surveillance in the spot around
5.00 pm., the motor bike bearing No.KA 53 EK 9731 came
there. When the vehicle was stopped the rider of the bike was
apprehended but the pillion rider ran away from the spot. On
enquiry the rider has informed his name and address.

On
further probing he has stated that he is in possession of
contraband. The gazetted officer Dy.SP was called to the spot.
During his presence, search was conducted.

5
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.8705/2022
During search 1250 grams of ganja was found and
seized. Thereafter, a detailed seizure panchanama was drawn.
A detail report was prepared and submitted before SHO.
Basing on the report, a case in Cr.329/2022 is registered for
the offence punishable U/s.20(b) of NDPS Act.

Thereafter
accused was arrested and produced before jurisdictional
Magistrate and remanded to judicial custody.

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 in all 1 Kg 250 grams of ganja is
seized from the petitioner and other accused.

The offence
6
punishable with imprisonment upto 10 years and with fine.
There are prima­facie material available against them.

10.

On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
24.8.2022 complainant has conducted raid and apprehended
accused No.1. On looking to the seizure panchanama the
drugs seized from accused No.1 is weighing 1 Kg., 250 grams
of ganja is seized.

As per specification of small and
commercial
of
quantity
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 1 Kgs. 250 grams 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
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.8705/2022
7
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 1 Kg 250 grams of ganja 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 investigation in the case is
concluded as the incriminatory article is already seized from
accused.

The offence alleged against the petitioner is not
punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
custodial
interrogation
is
not
warranted.

As
Further
per
the
8
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 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
co­operate
investigation.

with
I.O
for
9
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.8705/2022
5.

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

6.

He shall furnish his photo ID proof 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.

[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 14th day of September 2022)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.