In a notable judicial order, the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS cases at Bengaluru (CCH-33) allowed the bail application filed by Sadik Pasha @ Syed Pasha (Accused No. 6) in Crl.Misc.No.6688/2022. The petitioner was arrested in connection with Crime No. 297/2022 registered by the Madanayakanahalli Police Station for offences punishable under Section 20(B) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. The ruling reinforces established legal principles regarding intermediate contraband quantities, confirming that non-commercial recoveries do not trigger the strict statutory bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Case Background and Prosecution Allegations

The criminal proceedings originated on June 21, 2022, when the Police Inspector (PI) of Madanayakanahalli Police Station received credible information at around 4:30 PM. An informant reported that in front of Hotte Ramanna building, at a shop belonging to one Sathpal in Prabha Nagar, Makali Village, Dasanapura Hobli, a worker named Vikas Sharma along with four other persons was engaged in selling ganja.

Upon receiving the information, the police officer registered Crime No. 297/2022 against Sathpal, Vikas Sharma, and four unknown persons under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act. Thereafter, the Police Inspector notified higher officials, obtained necessary permission to conduct a raid, and assembled a team comprising police staff and independent panchas (witnesses).

The raiding team arrived at the spot in the evening and mounted surveillance. The team observed six individuals holding plastic covers, attempting to sell ganja to the public, while two persons stood nearby holding motorcycles. Upon inspecting the plastic covers, police found ganja leaves, stems, flowers, and fruits weighing a total of 4 kilograms. The contraband was seized under a spot seizure mahazar.

During interrogation, it was alleged that Accused Nos. 1 and 2 had brought the ganja from Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh to sell to the public, while Accused Nos. 5 and 6 were packing and selling the substance. All six accused (Accused Nos. 1 to 6) were arrested on June 21, 2022, produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate, and remanded to judicial custody. The petitioner, Sadik Pasha @ Syed Pasha, aged about 50 years, residing at Ward No. 14, Someshwara Nagar, Magadi Taluk, Ramanagara, was arrayed as Accused No. 6.

Submissions by the Defense

Represented by advocate Sri N.K.T.H., the petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) urging the following grounds:

• Innocence and False Implication: The petitioner asserted that he is an innocent, law-abiding citizen who had not committed any offence and was falsely implicated at the instance of extraneous elements.
• Lack of Knowledge and Overt Acts: The defense argued that the petitioner had no knowledge of the alleged crime and was planted in the case by the police. It was submitted that there was no specific overt act attributed to him in the investigation papers.
• Procedural Safeguards: It was contended that mandatory statutory safeguards under Sections 41, 42, 47, 50, and 52 of the NDPS Act were not complied with during the raid and search operations.
• Intermediate Quantity: The defense emphasized that the total seized quantity of 4 kg of ganja fell well below the commercial threshold under the statutory notification.
• Personal Circumstances: The petitioner submitted that he has no bad antecedents, is the sole breadwinner for his family, and is a permanent resident of the address provided in the cause title. He expressed full readiness to offer sureties and abide by any court conditions.

Objections Raised by the Prosecution

The prosecution, represented by the learned Public Prosecutor, strongly opposed the bail petition on the following grounds:

• Seizure of Contraband: Investigating authorities seized 4 kilograms of ganja under a detailed spot mahazar from the scene involving the petitioner and co-accused.
• Severity of Punishment: The alleged offence carries rigorous imprisonment extending up to 10 years along with a fine.
• Prima Facie Case and Role: The prosecution contended that a prima facie case exists against the petitioner, alleging that he used to purchase ganja from Accused Nos. 1 and 2 to sell to the public.
• Flight Risk and Habitual Offending: Alleging that the petitioner is a habitual drug dealer, the prosecution argued that if released on bail, he would abscond, tamper with prosecution witnesses, and hamper the ongoing investigation.

Judicial Findings and Legal Analysis

The presiding judge, Smt. B.S. Jayashree, carefully evaluated the prosecution records, statutory provisions, and arguments from both sides before deciding the core issue: whether the petitioner had made out sufficient grounds to be enlarged on bail.

Classification of Contraband Quantity

The court examined the seizure papers alongside Notification S.O.1055(E) dated October 19, 2001, issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue). Under Entry Sl. No. 55:

• Small Quantity for Ganja: Up to 1,000 grams (1 kilogram).
• Commercial Quantity for Ganja: 20 kilograms or more.

The court observed that the total recovery of 4 kilograms of ganja falls between 1 kilogram and 20 kilograms, explicitly placing it in the intermediate quantity category.

Absence of Specific Overt Act

Analyzing the investigation materials, the court highlighted that there was no specific overt act demonstrated against the petitioner (Accused No. 6). While the prosecution alleged that he purchased ganja from Accused Nos. 1 and 2, no concrete material was placed on record at that stage to substantiate the allegation.

Applicability of Precedents and Section 37 NDPS Act

The court placed reliance on the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Birbal Prasad v. State of Bihar ((2018) 11 SCC 488), where the Apex Court granted bail for possession of 14 kg of ganja (a non-commercial quantity) in the absence of prior criminal records.

Applying this precedent, Judge B.S. Jayashree observed:

1. When the quantity of contraband seized is less than commercial quantity, the strict rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply.
2. Considerations for bail revert to regular statutory principles governing non-commercial offences under the Cr.P.C., unless exceptional adverse circumstances are demonstrated by the prosecution.
3. The major portion of the investigation was concluded since the incriminatory contraband had already been seized from the accused.
4. The alleged offence is not punishable with death or life imprisonment, and the voluntary statement of the accused had been recorded, making further custodial interrogation unnecessary.
5. The petitioner is a permanent resident whose presence at trial can be secured, and prosecution apprehensions regarding flight risk or trial delay can be effectively mitigated through stringent bail conditions.

The court explicitly noted that the grant of bail does not amount to a final determination of guilt, which remains a matter to be established during the full-fledged trial.

Final Order and Terms of Bail

Answering Point No. 1 in the Affirmative, the court allowed Crl.Misc.No.6688/2022 on July 12, 2022, ordering the release of Sadik Pasha @ Syed Pasha on regular bail.

Pronounced in Open Court, the exact substance of the final order is as follows:

The petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum with the 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 co-operate with I.O for investigation.
5. He shall not commit similar offence or any offence while on bail.
6. He shall furnish his photo ID proof and local address proof document before the court 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.