Bail granted for intermediate quantity NDPS offence citing prolonged custody and trial delay despite criminal antecedents.

The applicant, Sanabbar, was arrested on November 15, 2025, following the interception of a vehicle he was driving by the Sarangpur Police

A search of the vehicle led to the recovery of 42.50 grams of Mephedrone (MD) concealed beneath the driver's seat

Consequently, Crime No. 779/2025 was registered under Sections 8 and 22 of the NDPS Act

The applicant filed this second bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS after his first application was dismissed as withdrawn on February 13, 2026

The defense argued false implication, noting that the independent seizure witness did not support the prosecution and the applicant had been acquitted in three of his seven recorded criminal antecedents

The State opposed the bail citing the gravity of the offence and the applicant's criminal history

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, considering the period of incarceration, the nature of the seizure, and his criminal antecedents

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail

penal provisions of Sections 8 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act

Section 346 of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 309 of the Cr.P.C.) to ensure the timely examination of witnesses during the trial

The court observed that the applicant had been in judicial custody since November 15, 2025, and that the trial would likely consume significant time

It noted that the veracity of the search and seizure procedures, as well as the complicity of the applicant, are matters to be determined during the trial

Regarding criminal antecedents, the court acknowledged the applicant’s claim of acquittal in several previous cases and pending status in others

The court determined that given the applicant's socio-economic status and family responsibilities, there was no immediate risk of him fleeing justice, tampering with evidence, or repeating the offence

the court deemed it necessary to impose "stringent conditions" alongside the bail order to ensure future compliance

The applicant was ordered to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 75,000 with one surety of the same amount

The holding was subject to several conditions, including that the applicant must not commit similar offences, must not tamper with evidence, and must mark his presence at Police Station Sarangpur on the first Saturday of every month until the conclusion of the trial