A second NDPS bail application requires substantial change in circumstances after merits-based rejection.

The applicant filed a second application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 50/2025 registered at Police Station Purur, District Balod, for an offence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

On 21 May 2025, police intercepted a motorcycle carrying the applicant and another person and allegedly recovered four packets of ganja weighing 7.770 kg, 7.810 kg, 6.570 kg and 3.320 kg, together with bags, a motorcycle and personal articles.

The applicant had remained in custody since 21 May 2025.

His earlier bail application, MCRC No. 400 of 2026, was rejected on merits on 13 January 2026.

In the second application, he relied on alleged non-compliance with the NDPS Act and Standing Orders Nos. 1/88 and 1/89, prolonged incarceration, and the fact that 10 of the 14 prosecution witnesses had been examined.

The State opposed the application.

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, notwithstanding the rejection of his earlier bail application on merits?

Whether the applicant’s prolonged custody and progress of the trial constituted a substantial change in circumstances warranting reconsideration of bail?

Whether the Court should issue a direction for expeditious conclusion of the pending trial after rejecting bail?

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail, and Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, concerning punishment for offences involving cannabis.

In considering a successive bail application, the Court assessed whether there had been a substantial change in circumstances after rejection of the earlier application on merits.

The Court also considered the nature and gravity of the alleged offence, the stage and progress of the trial, and the period of custody.

The applicant relied on Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1109, regarding prolonged incarceration in cases involving Section 37 of the NDPS Act; however, the order does not expressly apply that precedent as the basis for granting bail.

The Court noted that the earlier bail application had been rejected on merits and found no substantial change in circumstances since that order.

Although the applicant had remained in custody for more than one year and two months and had raised allegations regarding search and seizure compliance, the Court gave primary weight to the nature and gravity of the alleged NDPS offence and the fact that only four of the 14 prosecution witnesses remained to be examined.

Consequently, the Court held that the circumstances did not justify grant of regular bail at that stage.

Recognising that the trial was substantially advanced, it directed the trial court to make an earnest endeavour to conclude the proceedings within four months, subject to there being no legal impediment.

The Court directed the concerned trial court to endeavour to conclude the trial within four months from receipt of the certified copy of the order, in accordance with law and subject to there being no legal impediment.