Bail granted for intermediate quantity of Heroin considering lack of criminal antecedents and prolonged incarceration.

The applicant was arrested on December 3, 2025, near JP Garden, Sarona Railway Station Road, following a police raid based on informant information.

A search of the applicant’s bag led to the recovery of 51.85 grams of heroin (chitta) and a mobile phone.

An FIR (Crime No. 372/2025) was registered at Police Station Amanaka for offences under the NDPS Act.

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, asserting false implication and noting that the quantity seized was below the commercial threshold.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail considering the quantity of the seized substance and his lack of criminal antecedents.

Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, which pertains to punishments for contravention in relation to manufactured drugs and preparations involving intermediate quantities.

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, regarding the power of the High Court to grant bail.

Sections 269, 84, 209, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS regarding conditions of bail and penalties for non-compliance.

The court observed that the quantity of heroin recovered (51.85 grams) constitutes an "intermediate quantity," which is less than the commercial quantity defined under the NDPS Act.

The court took judicial notice of the fact that the applicant had no prior criminal record under the NDPS Act.

The court considered the procedural status of the case, noting that the charge-sheet had already been filed and that the applicant had been in custody since December 3, 2025.

Given that the trial was likely to take a significant amount of time to conclude, the court determined that continued incarceration was not warranted.

The holding is contingent upon strict conditions, including the applicant’s presence at all trial dates and an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments; failure to comply allows the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of liberty and proceed under Sections 269 or 209 of the BNS.