A Special NDPS Court in Bengaluru has granted bail to 37-year-old Syed Nayaz, alias Syed, who was arrested in December 2022 for allegedly possessing a cocktail of narcotic substances. The order was delivered on January 3, 2023, by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS. The court ruled that since the quantity of drugs seized did not meet the “commercial” threshold defined under the law, the stringent restrictions on bail typically seen in drug cases were not applicable.

Syed Nayaz, a resident of Pulikeshinagar and formerly of Shivajinagar, was apprehended by the Yeshwanthpur Police under Crime Number 436/2022. He faced charges under Section 20(b) and Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. These sections pertain to the possession and sale of cannabis and manufactured psychotropic substances, respectively.

The Incident: A Trap Near Kendriya Vidyalaya

The prosecution’s case began on December 28, 2022, following a tip-off received by the Yeshwanthpur Police. The information suggested that a person was operating out of an i10 car near the Kendriya Vidyalaya bus stand, attempting to sell narcotics to customers. Acting on this lead, the police dispatched a “decoy” to confirm the transaction. Once a signal was received from the decoy, the police moved in and surrounded the suspect.

Upon searching Syed Nayaz and his vehicle, the police reportedly discovered three types of contraband: 560 grams of ganja (cannabis), 1.98 grams of MDMA, and 2.15 grams of ecstasy powder. The police seized the substances and the vehicle under a mahazar (seizure memo) and placed Nayaz under arrest.

Legal Arguments: Small vs. Commercial Quantity

During the bail hearing, the petitioner’s counsel argued that Syed Nayaz had been falsely implicated and that the police had failed to follow the mandatory procedural safeguards required under Section 41, Section 42, and Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. These sections provide strict guidelines for searches, seizures, and the right of the accused to be searched in the presence of a gazetted officer or a magistrate.

The prosecution strongly opposed the bail, highlighting that the accused was found with multiple types of drugs and was allegedly targeting the younger generation. They argued that the offenses carried a penalty of up to 10 to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and that releasing the accused would hamper the investigation, particularly in tracing the drug supplier who remains absconding.

Judicial Analysis: The Threshold of Section 37

In her detailed order, Judge B.S. Jayashree focused on the weight of the seized drugs as per the Ministry of Finance Notification. The court observed that 1,000 grams of ganja is the threshold for a “small quantity,” making the 560 grams seized a minor offense. For MDMA, 10 grams is considered “commercial.” The seizure of 1.98 grams of MDMA and 2.15 grams of ecstasy was thus classified as “intermediate quantity.”

The court noted that when the quantity is less than commercial, the rigors of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—which makes bail nearly impossible—do not apply. Instead, the court follows the regular standards of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Birbal Prasad vs. State of Bihar, the judge emphasized that in cases involving non-commercial quantities where the accused has no prior criminal record, bail should be considered the norm.

Conclusion and Conditions for Release

The court found that the major portion of the investigation was complete as the drugs had already been seized. Since the offenses were not punishable by death or life imprisonment, the court saw no reason for continued custodial interrogation. Syed Nayaz was ordered to be released on a personal bond of 1,00,000 rupees with two sureties of the same amount.

The bail is subject to several conditions: the petitioner must attend the police station once a month until the charge sheet is filed, he must not leave the jurisdiction of the court without permission, and he is strictly prohibited from tampering with witnesses or committing similar offenses. Failure to comply with any of these terms would lead to the immediate cancellation of his bail.