Clean criminal record and socio-economic status justify bail in intermediate quantity NDPS offences.

On January 18, 2026, the applicant, Raj Rajak @ Lucky, was intercepted by the Bargi Police near Tinsi Phatak based on secret information.

Upon a search of carry bags held in joint possession by the applicant and co-accused Amit @ Takku Rajak, eight packets containing 7.789 kg of Ganja (narcotic contraband) were recovered.

The applicant was arrested on the spot and charged under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act in Crime No. 22/2026.

The applicant, a 19-year-old laborer with no prior criminal record, sought bail on the grounds of false implication, procedural non-compliance during search and seizure, and the hardship caused by prolonged incarceration.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in light of the facts and circumstances of the recovery.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (the successor to Section 439 CrPC), regarding the High Court's power to grant bail.

Provisions of Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act.

The legal principle that bail may be granted where there is a lack of criminal antecedents, the accused has deep roots in society, and there is no evidence suggesting a likelihood of tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice.

The court evaluated the applicant’s socio-economic status and age, noting he is a 19-year-old laborer with family roots and no reported criminal history.

While the State argued against bail based on the gravity of the offense, the court found that the quantity recovered (7.789 kg) was from joint possession and that the applicant's contentions regarding procedural lapses in search and seizure had prima facie merit for the purpose of the bail application.

The court reasoned that since the final report had been submitted and the trial would likely be protracted, there was no compelling reason for continued incarceration.

Furthermore, the court determined that the risk of the applicant fleeing or influencing witnesses was minimal given his background.

The holding was conditioned upon the applicant furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

The grant of bail was further subject to mandatory conditions, including regular court attendance, a prohibition on committing similar offenses, and a prohibition on tampering with evidence or inducing/threatening witnesses.

The court clarified that the order remains effective until the conclusion of the trial unless conditions are breached.