Bail granted for below-commercial-quantity ganja possession where Section 37 NDPS Act restrictions were inapplicable.

The applicants, Sunil Kashyap and Sagar Kashyap, were arrested in connection with Crime No. 223/2026 registered at Police Station Bodhghat, District Bastar, for an offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

The prosecution alleged that, pursuant to secret information, police searched the applicants and recovered three packets containing ganja—one from a black backpack and two from a maroon backpack—allegedly in their joint possession. The total quantity seized was 15.110 kg.

The applicants filed their first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. They alleged false implication and non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act, and contended that the recovered quantity was less than the commercial quantity of ganja, which they stated was 20 kg.

The State opposed bail but conceded that the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicants had no criminal antecedents, and the recovered quantity was below the commercial quantity.

Whether the applicants were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 15.110 kg of ganja.

Whether the fact that the recovered quantity was less than the commercial quantity, coupled with the applicants’ lack of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, period of custody, and anticipated delay in trial, justified 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)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, concerning possession of cannabis in a quantity greater than small but less than commercial quantity.

The Court considered the statutory threshold for commercial quantity and treated the recovery of 15.110 kg of ganja as below the commercial quantity of 20 kg. Since the alleged quantity was not commercial, the stringent twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not treated as applicable in the same manner as they would be in a commercial-quantity case.

The Court also considered the settled bail factors of filing of the charge-sheet, absence of criminal antecedents, length of custody, and the likelihood of delay in conclusion of trial.

The Court found that the applicants had been in custody since 12 June 2026, the charge-sheet had already been filed, and they had no criminal antecedents. Most importantly, the alleged recovery of 15.110 kg of ganja from their joint possession was below the commercial quantity.

Although the State opposed bail on the ground of the seriousness of the offence, it acknowledged the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicants’ clean antecedents, and the quantity being below the commercial threshold. Balancing these circumstances against the likelihood that the trial would take considerable time, the Court concluded that continued detention was not warranted and that the applicants could be released subject to stringent conditions.

The Court directed that Sunil Kashyap and Sagar Kashyap be released on bail upon furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

The applicants were required not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial Court as directed, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of their statements under Section 351 of the BNSS. Breach or misuse of bail could result in appropriate proceedings, including action for non-appearance and proclamation under the applicable statutory provisions.