Bail denied where commercial-quantity contraband recovery and co-accused evidence prima facie implicate the applicant.

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 71/2026 registered at Police Station Sariya, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh, for an offence under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”).

On 7 April 2026, acting on secret information, the police intercepted an allegedly suspicious Swift Dzire vehicle travelling from Odisha towards Sariya. The driver fled, whereafter the vehicle was searched and 62.245 kg of ganja was allegedly recovered from its dicky.

During investigation, co-accused Suryaprakash Chandra was arrested and his memorandum statement, together with mobile-phone tracking, was relied upon to implicate the applicant.

The applicant contended that no contraband had been recovered from his possession, that he had been implicated solely on the basis of the co-accused’s memorandum statement, that he had no criminal antecedents, and that the charge-sheet had been filed. He had remained in custody since 9 July 2026.

The State opposed bail on the ground that 62 kg of ganja—substantially exceeding the commercial quantity—had been recovered in the case.

Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 62.245 kg of ganja?

Whether the absence of direct recovery from the applicant, coupled with his alleged implication through a co-accused’s memorandum statement and mobile tracking, justified the grant of 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, which criminalises possession, transportation, or other unlawful dealings in cannabis/ganja.

In assessing bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the offence, the quantity of contraband allegedly involved, and the applicant’s apparent connection with the offence based on the investigation material.

The Court treated the alleged recovery of 62.245 kg of ganja as a quantity substantially above the commercial quantity and consequently as a serious circumstance militating against bail at that stage.

The Court acknowledged that the contraband had not been recovered directly from the applicant and that his involvement was based on the co-accused’s memorandum statement and mobile tracking.

However, it considered the alleged recovery of 62.245 kg of ganja from the vehicle, described as much above the commercial quantity, to be a grave circumstance.

On the material placed before it, the Court found that the applicant appeared to be involved in the offence and held that the seriousness of the alleged narcotics transaction outweighed the applicant’s submissions regarding lack of direct recovery, absence of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, and the anticipated delay in trial.

Accordingly, the Court was not inclined to grant bail at that stage.

It rejected Swadhin Kumar Nayak’s first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 71/2026 registered under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, holding that the alleged recovery of 62.245 kg of ganja and the applicant’s apparent involvement justified denial of bail at that stage.