Bail is warranted for intermediate-quantity ganja possession where Section 37 of the NDPS Act is inapplicable.

On 6 June 2026, Police Station Ganj, Raipur, acting on secret information, conducted a raid near Expressway Road, Chuna Bhatti, Raipur.

The applicant, Ramdas, was allegedly found carrying a dark-grey pittu bag containing 5.990 kg of ganja, which he had allegedly brought from Odisha for sale in Raipur.

The contraband was seized and Crime No. 172/2026 was registered under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”).

The applicant had been in custody since 7 June 2026, had no criminal antecedents, and the charge-sheet had been filed.

This was his first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”).

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS in a prosecution under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act involving recovery of 5.990 kg of ganja.

Whether the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied, considering that the recovered quantity was below the prescribed commercial quantity of 20 kg.

Whether the applicant’s contentions regarding non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act and absence of exclusive possession justified denial of bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the BNSS, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail, and Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act, which penalises possession, sale, purchase, transport, or other dealings in cannabis in contravention of the Act.

Section 37 of the NDPS Act imposes stringent conditions for bail in cases involving offences punishable under the specified provisions, particularly where the alleged offence involves commercial quantity; the Court treated the recovered 5.990 kg of ganja as less than the prescribed commercial quantity of 20 kg and therefore found the rigours of Section 37 inapplicable.

The Court also considered the general bail factors of the applicant’s lack of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, and the likely delay in conclusion of trial.

The Court considered the prosecution allegation that 5.990 kg of ganja had been recovered from the applicant, but noted that the quantity was below the commercial quantity prescribed under the NDPS Act.

Consequently, the heightened restrictions under Section 37 were not treated as applicable.

The Court further relied on the applicant’s absence of criminal antecedents and the fact that the charge-sheet had already been filed, reducing the necessity for continued custodial detention.

Although the applicant challenged the alleged exclusive possession and asserted non-compliance with Section 42, the Court did not finally adjudicate those issues at the bail stage and granted bail on the cumulative circumstances recorded in the order.

Release was made subject to furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.

The applicant was required, inter alia, not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, remain present on scheduled dates, appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS, and comply with the consequences prescribed for misuse of bail or failure to appear.