Bail Granted for Below-Commercial-Quantity Tramadol Possession After Charge-Sheet Filing

On 18 February 2026, Excise officials intercepted the applicant while he was riding a motorcycle and allegedly recovered 224 Spasmo Proxyvon Plus capsules, weighing 136.64 grams, from a bag hanging on the motorcycle.

An offence under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) was registered.

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

He submitted that the alleged Tramadol quantity was below the notified commercial quantity, that the charge-sheet had been filed, and that he had been in custody since his arrest; he had one criminal antecedent.

The State opposed bail, relying on the alleged recovery and the antecedent.

Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, having regard to the alleged recovery, custody, charge-sheet, and criminal antecedent.

Section 483 of the BNSS provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of an application for regular bail.

The alleged offence was under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act.

In assessing bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the alleged offence, the quantity seized in relation to the notified commercial quantity, the filing of the charge-sheet, the period of custody, the applicant’s criminal antecedent, and the expected duration of the trial.

The Court noted that the alleged quantity—136.64 grams—was below the notified commercial quantity, and that the charge-sheet had been filed while the applicant remained in custody from 18 February 2026.

Balancing those circumstances against the nature of the allegation and the applicant’s criminal antecedent, the Court also considered that the trial was likely to take time.

On that basis, without commenting on the merits, it found the applicant entitled to bail.

It directed the applicant’s release upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to conditions against influencing persons acquainted with the case, prejudicing a fair and expeditious trial, and failure to attend each hearing until disposal of the trial.