The Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) in Bengaluru has granted bail to 28-year-old Vinodh Kumar, alias Kothi, who was arrested in June 2022 for the alleged possession of cannabis. The order was delivered on August 24, 2022, by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS. The court observed that the quantity of the drug seized fell into the “intermediate” category, meaning the stringent statutory bars against bail did not strictly apply.

Vinodh Kumar, a resident of Kashinagara, was named as the primary accused in Crime Number 192/2022 registered by the Kumaraswamy Layout Police. He faced charges under Section 20(B)(ii)(b) and Section 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. These sections deal with the punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis and the consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance.

The Incident: A Morning Raid near Annyappanakere Park

The prosecution’s case was based on a report filed by the Police Sub-Inspector of Kumaraswamy Layout Police Station. On June 24, 2022, the police received credible information regarding two individuals allegedly selling drugs near Annyappanakere Park in Chandra Nagar. Following permission from higher officers, a raid was conducted at approximately 11:35 a.m.

According to the police report, as the team approached the spot, one suspect managed to flee. The police apprehended the remaining individual, who identified himself as Vinodh Kumar. A search of a bag in his possession revealed a mix of cannabis components: 200 grams of ganja plant sticks, 200 grams of seeds, and 650 grams of leaves. The total weight of the seized contraband was recorded as 1 kilogram and 50 grams. The materials were seized under a panchanama (seizure memo), and the accused was subsequently remanded to judicial custody.

Arguments for the Defense: Procedural Lapses and Family Hardship

Advocates representing Vinodh Kumar argued that the petitioner was an innocent, law-abiding citizen who had been falsely implicated at the behest of “extraneous elements.” The defense contended that the police had failed to comply with mandatory procedural safeguards under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, specifically Section 41 (power to issue warrant and authorization), Section 42 (power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant), and Section 50 (conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted).

Furthermore, the defense highlighted that there were no independent eyewitnesses to the alleged sale of drugs. They argued that the quantity seized was not “commercial” and that Vinodh Kumar, being the sole breadwinner for his family, would suffer undue hardship if kept in custody. The petitioner pledged to abide by all court conditions and provide reliable sureties for his release.

Prosecution Opposes Liberty for ‘Habitual Dealer’

The Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail petition, asserting that the accused was caught red-handed with a significant amount of narcotics. The prosecution characterized Vinodh Kumar as a “habitual drug dealer” and argued that his release would jeopardize the ongoing investigation. They contended that given the seriousness of the offence, which carries a potential sentence of up to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment, there was a high risk of the accused absconding or tampering with evidence.

Judicial Analysis: The Classification of Quantity

In her assessment, Judge B.S. Jayashree focused on the classification of the seized substance. Under the Ministry of Finance Notification dated October 19, 2001, for ganja (cannabis), 1,000 grams is categorized as a “small quantity,” while 20 kilograms is categorized as a “commercial quantity.”

The court noted that the 1.05 kilograms seized in this case qualifies as an “intermediate quantity.” Citing the Supreme Court of India precedent in Birbal Prasad vs. State of Bihar (2018), the court noted that when dealing with non-commercial quantities, the rigors of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—which places a high burden on the accused to prove innocence for the purpose of bail—do not apply. Instead, the court follows standard bail principles under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Conclusion and Conditions of Bail

The court concluded that since the incriminatory articles had already been seized and the major portion of the investigation was over, custodial interrogation was no longer necessary. Vinodh Kumar 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 prior permission, and he is strictly prohibited from tampering with witnesses or committing similar offences. The court warned that any breach of these conditions would lead to the immediate cancellation of his bail.