Anticipatory bail may be granted in intermediate-quantity NDPS cases where no contraband is recovered from the accused.

On 7 April 2026, police received information that three persons near Old P.B. Road, Belagavi, possessed ganja. A search resulted in the seizure of 1 kg 190 g of ganja from accused Nos. 1–3. During investigation, they named the petitioner, accused No. 4, as the source of the contraband.

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in Crime No. 70/2026, registered under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. He argued that nothing had been seized from him and that he had been implicated on the basis of the co-accused’s statements; the State opposed the petition, citing the seriousness of the offence and alleged antecedents.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail where no contraband had been recovered from him and his implication arose from the statements of accused Nos. 1–3

Whether the restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act precluded granting bail in the circumstances of this case

Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act addresses offences involving a quantity greater than small but less than commercial quantity.

Section 37(1)(b) imposes additional restrictions on bail for specified offences and offences involving commercial quantity: where the Public Prosecutor opposes bail, the court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit an offence while on bail.

The judgment refers to the “twin conditions” under Section 37, although it cites Section 37(1)(d) at one point.

The court noted that the ganja was recovered from accused Nos. 1–3, not from the petitioner, and that his name emerged during the investigation from their statements.

It found no material on the record establishing reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner was guilty, observed that Section 37’s rigour was not attracted, and noted that the petitioner was not a habitual offender.

Having considered the nature and gravity of the allegation, the court concluded that bail was appropriate.

The police were directed to release the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 70/2026, subject to conditions including a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with one surety, surrender before the investigating officer within 15 days of receiving the certified order, attendance at court hearings, non-interference with witnesses, monthly attendance before the investigating officer for up to six months or until the charge-sheet is filed, and no involvement in similar offences. Breach of any condition may result in cancellation of bail.