The Special Court for NDPS cases in Bengaluru has granted bail to 23-year-old Rijin MP, who was arrested by the Suddaguntepalya police for allegedly possessing and attempting to sell ganja. The order, delivered on August 23, 2022, by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS, emphasized the legal distinction between commercial and intermediate quantities of narcotics when determining the eligibility for bail.

Background of the Arrest and Investigation

The case against Rijin MP originated on August 17, 2022, following a series of surveillance operations by the Suddaguntepalya Police Station. According to the prosecution, the police received credible intelligence that a person named Rijin had been selling ganja at the Suddaguntepalya park, specifically near the Bhavaninagar last gate, on August 15. The information suggested that the suspect would return to the same location on August 17 to conduct further sales.

Upon receiving permission from higher authorities, a police team along with independent witnesses (panchas) mounted a surveillance operation at the park around 11:15 AM. The police observed a person carrying a bag who appeared to be waiting for customers. When the suspect noticed the police presence, he reportedly attempted to throw the bag and flee the scene. However, the police team managed to surround and apprehend him. Upon inspection of the discarded bag, the police recovered 1 kilogram and 50 grams of ganja.

Following the seizure, a formal report was prepared, and an FIR was registered under Crime No. 231/2022 for offences punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Legal Arguments Presented by the Defense

The petitioner, Rijin MP, represented by his legal counsel, argued that he was a law-abiding citizen who had been falsely implicated in the case. The defense contended that the police did not follow the mandatory procedural safeguards contemplated under the NDPS Act during the search and recovery process. Specifically, they questioned the compliance with Sections 41, 42, 50, and 52 of the Act, which govern the methods of search and the rights of the accused.

Furthermore, the defense highlighted that Rijin had no prior criminal record and was a permanent resident of the addresses provided to the court, one in Bengaluru and one in Kerala. They argued that since the quantity seized was not a “commercial quantity,” the stringent bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act should not apply. The petitioner expressed his willingness to abide by any court-imposed conditions and provide sufficient surety for his release.

Prosecution Opposes Release Based on Habitual Conduct

The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application, categorizing the offence as heinous and detrimental to society. The prosecution alleged that Rijin was a habitual drug dealer and argued that there was a strong prima facie case against him. They voiced concerns that if released, the petitioner would likely return to the trade of selling narcotic drugs, tamper with evidence, or abscond to evade trial. They emphasized that the law allows for rigorous imprisonment of up to 20 years for such offences, reflecting the gravity of the crime.

The Court’s Analysis of Narcotic Quantities

The central factor in the court’s decision was the weight of the seized ganja. Under the Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Notification S.O.1055(E), the law defines specific thresholds for “small” and “commercial” quantities. For ganja, 1,000 grams (1 kg) is considered a small quantity, while 20 kilograms or more is considered a commercial quantity.

The court noted that the 1 kilogram and 50 grams seized from Rijin MP falls into the “intermediate quantity” category. Judge B.S. Jayashree cited a landmark Supreme Court ruling, Birbal Prasad Vs. State of Bihar (2018), which established that when an accused is found with a non-commercial quantity and has no other pending cases, they should generally be considered for bail pending trial.

The court observed that for intermediate quantities, the “rigors of Section 37” of the NDPS Act—which make it extremely difficult to obtain bail—are not triggered. Instead, the application is treated similarly to those under regular criminal statutes unless exceptional circumstances are proven.

Conclusion and Bail Conditions

The court concluded that since the investigation had largely concluded with the seizure of the contraband and the recording of the petitioner’s voluntary statement, further custodial interrogation was not required. To mitigate the prosecution’s fears of the accused absconding, the court imposed a set of stringent conditions.

Rijin MP was ordered to be released on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties for the like sum, subject to the following conditions:

• Attendance: He must appear before the Investigating Officer once a month (on the first Monday) until the charge sheet is filed.
• Jurisdiction: He is prohibited from leaving the court’s jurisdiction without prior permission.
• Tampering: He must not tamper with witnesses or evidence.
• Cooperation: He must fully cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
• Recidivism: He is strictly prohibited from committing any similar or new offences while on bail.
• Documentation: He must furnish valid photo ID proof for himself and his sureties.
• Court Appearance: He must appear before the court on all designated hearing dates.

The court warned that any breach of these conditions would result in the automatic cancellation of the bail.