Commercial Quantity NDPS Interim Bail Denied Due to Multiple Antecedents and Failure to Prove Compelling Circumstances

The Petitioner, Dhanjay Kumar, was arrested in connection with FIR No. 1009/2024 at P.S. Paschim Vihar West for offences under Sections 20(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act, involving the trafficking of over 40 kilograms of Ganja (commercial quantity)

The Petitioner’s regular bail applications were previously dismissed by the Trial Court on 29.10.2025 and by the High Court on 16.05.2026

The Petitioner subsequently sought interim bail for 20 days on humanitarian grounds to attend his sister’s wedding in Patna, Bihar, scheduled for 19.06.2026, claiming he was the only brother available to perform religious ceremonies

The Trial Court dismissed the interim bail plea on 02.06.2026, leading to the present petition

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to interim bail on humanitarian grounds for a sibling's wedding despite the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and his criminal antecedents?

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Sections 37 and 32A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), 1985

Under Section 37, the grant of bail is restricted by mandatory conditions that override general principles of bail

Athar Parvez v. State of NCT of Delhi, CRL.REF. 1/2015, which establishes that interim bail in NDPS cases should be granted only in "rare and exceptional circumstances" where compelling reasons exist and the court is satisfied the accused will not commit further offences

The Court observed that the Petitioner was charged with possession of a commercial quantity of narcotics, which triggers the stringent mandatory restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act

While the State verified the factum of the wedding, it opposed the bail based on the Petitioner’s status as a "habitual offender" with multiple antecedents, including involvement in two other similar cases

The Court noted that the Petitioner failed to substantiate the claim that his other brothers were estranged; therefore, his presence was not deemed indispensable for the religious ceremonies

Applying the Athar Parvez standard, the Court reasoned that the gravity of the offence, the quantity of the substance involved, and the risk of recidivism outweighed the humanitarian grounds presented

The Court found the Petitioner’s criminal history and the commercial quantity involved as sufficient grounds for denial. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the bail application