Bail granted for non-commercial quantity of psychotropic substance despite criminal antecedents and pending trial.

The applicants were arrested on 08.01.2026 following a police raid based on secret information in Raipur, Chhattisgarh

The police seized 90.1 grams of Nitrazepam Tablet IP 10mg from their joint possession

Consequently, an FIR (Crime No. 11/2026) was registered under Section 21(B) of the NDPS Act

The applicants sought regular bail on the grounds that the quantity seized was below the commercial threshold, the charge sheet had already been filed, and their prior criminal records (3 antecedents for Ashish and 2 for Arman) had already been disposed of

The State opposed the bail, citing the recovery and the criminal history of the applicants

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering the quantity of contraband seized and the completion of the investigation

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail

Substantively, the case was governed by Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, which pertains to offences involving "intermediate" quantities of psychotropic substances (quantities greater than small but less than commercial)

The court also referenced Sections 209 and 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 84 and 351 of the BNSS regarding the consequences of violating bail conditions and procedural compliance

The Court evaluated the entitlement to bail by balancing the nature of the recovery against the duration of incarceration. It observed that the seized amount (90.1 grams of Nitrazepam) was less than the commercial quantity, meaning the stringent bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act did not strictly apply

The court noted that the charge sheet had been filed, signaling the conclusion of the primary investigation, and that the applicants had been in custody since 08.01.2026

Regarding criminal history, the Court found that although the applicants had prior antecedents, those cases had been disposed of, thereby mitigating the risk of recidivism during the trial

Given that a trial was likely to take a significant amount of time, the Court determined that further detention was not warranted

The applicants were ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions: they must not seek adjournments during witness testimony, must appear at all trial stages (charges, opening, and Section 351 BNSS statements), and must comply with all procedural mandates under the BNS and BNSS

The trial court was authorized to revoke bail in case of any default or abuse of liberty