Aggregate commercial-quantity recovery in an alleged NDPS conspiracy attracts Section 37 bail restrictions.

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case registered under Sections 20(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”).

The prosecution alleged that police intercepted the applicant and a co-accused on 5 November 2025 and seized 4.24 kg of ganja from the applicant and 4.36 kg from the co-accused.

Following information provided by them, police seized a further 14.954 kg from two other co-accused, making the total recovery 23.014 kg.

The applicant was taken into custody on 17 November 2025.

He relied on the quantity recovered from him being below commercial quantity, his lack of criminal antecedents, completion of the investigation and filing of the charge-sheet.

The State opposed bail, arguing that the total recovery exceeded commercial quantity and that Section 29 applied due to an alleged conspiracy.

Whether the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied to the applicant’s bail application, given the total recovery and the allegation of conspiracy.

Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail in the circumstances of the case.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provided the basis for the regular-bail application.

The Court considered Sections 20(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act, concerning the charged narcotics offence and alleged conspiracy, and Section 37, which it held imposed a stringent restriction on bail in this case because the total quantity recovered was above commercial quantity.

The Court stated that, at the bail stage, its role was confined to determining whether a prima facie case existed; recovery from the applicant indicated prima facie involvement in the illegal transit of ganja.

Although the quantity seized directly from the applicant was below commercial quantity, the Court considered the total recovery of 23.014 kg, which it found exceeded commercial quantity, together with the allegation that the accused had acted in conspiracy and the invocation of Section 29.

It concluded that the recovery from the applicant indicated prima facie involvement in the illegal transit of ganja and that the rigour of Section 37 therefore applied.

On that basis, the Court declined to grant bail.

The Court rejected the applicant’s regular-bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.