Bail granted for intermediate quantity of contraband where applicant lacks antecedents and trial is delayed.

The applicant was arrested on February 13, 2026, by the Bagbahara Police for allegedly transporting 7.70 kilograms of Ganja on a motorcycle near the Rewa River Ghat

The contraband, valued at approximately ₹3,50,000, was seized, and an FIR was registered under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act (later cited as Section 22(B) in the order)

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, contending false implication, non-compliance with search/seizure procedures, and that the quantity seized was "intermediate" rather than "commercial"

The investigation is complete, and the charge sheet has been filed

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail considering the quantity of contraband seized and the duration of his pretrial detention?

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

Section 22(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act

because the recovery was of an "intermediate quantity" (below commercial quantity), the strict rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act—which impose higher hurdles for bail in commercial quantity cases—were not attracted

Procedural conditions for the conduct of the trial were framed under Sections 269, 84, 209, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS respectively

The Court weighed the nature and gravity of the offense against several mitigating factors

It noted that the applicant had no prior criminal antecedents and had been in custody since February 13, 2026

Because the charge sheet had already been filed and the trial was expected to consume significant time, the Court reasoned that continued detention would serve as pre-trial punishment

The Court implicitly accepted the defense's argument that the 7.70 kg of Ganja constituted an intermediate quantity, thereby allowing for the exercise of judicial discretion without the restrictive mandates of Section 37 of the NDPS Act

The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties, subject to specific conditions: he must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must be present for all trial dates (specifically for framing charges and recording statements), and must comply with BNS/BNSS provisions regarding attendance, failing which the trial court may treat it as an abuse of liberty