Bail may be granted where contraband is below commercial quantity and implication is based solely on a co-accused's memorandum statement.

The applicant filed his first bail application following his arrest on February 9, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 78/2026

According to the prosecution, police intercepted a scooty driven by co-accused Saurabh Dixit based on an informer's tip and recovered 2.19 kg of green cannabis (Ganja) and cash

The applicant was implicated based on the memorandum statement of the co-accused

The applicant sought bail on the grounds of innocence, lack of direct recovery from his person, and the fact that the seized quantity was less than commercial

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the recovery was made from a co-accused and the quantity is non-commercial

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail

Substantively, the case involved Sections 20(b) and 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, which penalize the possession and consumption of narcotic substances

The court also referenced procedural compliance under Sections 269, 84, 209, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS to ensure the applicant’s future appearance and prevent abuse of liberty

The court examined the nature of the allegations and the specific role of the applicant, noting that the recovery of 2.199 kg of Ganja—a quantity less than commercial—was made from the co-accused rather than the applicant himself

The court weighed the applicant's period of detention (since February 9, 2026) against the fact that the charge sheet had already been filed and the trial was expected to take considerable time to conclude

furthermore, the court considered the State's submission that the applicant had no prior criminal record

By balancing the non-commercial nature of the contraband with the absence of criminal antecedents and the direct recovery involving a third party, the court reasoned that continued incarceration was not warranted

The holding was contingent upon several conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments [para. 7(i)], must appear on all fixed dates per Section 269 of BNS [para. 7(ii)], and must personally appear for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of BNSS [para. 7(iv)]. Any violation of these terms or failure to appear after a Section 84 BNSS proclamation would allow the trial court to initiate proceedings under Section 209 of the BNS