Bail Denied for Possession of Commercial Quantity of Tramadol Without Legal Authorization under NDPS Act

The applicant filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

On October 8, 2025, police acted on a tip-off and apprehended the applicant and two others on a motorcycle near District Hospital, Durg

A search of the applicant's brown bag yielded 720 capsules of PROXYCO-SPAS (Tramadol) weighing 432 grams, cash, and a mobile phone

Total seizures from all co-accused amounted to significantly higher quantities of Tramadol

The applicant contended he was falsely implicated, that no recovery was made from him directly, and that Section 50 of the NDPS Act was violated

The State opposed bail, noting the quantity recovered exceeded the commercial threshold

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under the NDPS Act given the recovery of 432 grams of Tramadol

2. Whether there exists a plausible explanation or grounds to believe the applicant is innocent despite the seizure of a commercial quantity of contraband

The court applied Sections 21(B) and 27(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985

Under the NDPS Act schedule, the small quantity for Tramadol is 5 grams and the commercial quantity is 250 grams

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (successor to Section 439 CrPC)

Mandatory search requirements under Section 50 of the NDPS Act

The court examined the case diary and found that the 432 grams of Tramadol recovered from the applicant's possession was substantially higher than the 250-gram commercial quantity threshold

The court dismissed the applicant's claim of false implication, noting that counsel failed to provide any plausible explanation for the possession of the contraband

It further observed that the trial was already in progress and the quantity recovered from all accused persons (including co-accused Ashib Mohammad who possessed over 3000 grams) indicated an organized involvement in the unlawful sale and distribution of psychotropic substances

The court found the gravity of the offense and the commercial nature of the seizure outweighed the applicant's arguments regarding the duration of custody and alleged procedural violations

The court directed the trial court to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. The application was dismissed