Parity and absence of criminal history warrant bail for intermediate quantity possession under the NDPS Act.

The applicant, Pradeep Deep, was arrested on October 31, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 568/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Raipur

The prosecution alleged that following a raid based on confidential information, 216 Tramadol tablets (weighing 131.76 grams) were seized from the joint possession of the applicant and a co-accused

The applicant was charged under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985

After the completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed

The applicant moved for regular bail, citing his clean criminal record, the intermediate nature of the seized quantity, and the fact that a similarly situated co-accused had been granted bail on February 10, 2026

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the alleged possession of an intermediate quantity of psychotropic substances

The Court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which provides the High Court with the power to grant bail (the successor provision to Section 439 of the CrPC)

Substantively, the case fell under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, which prescribes punishment for contravention in relation to psychotropic substances involving an "intermediate quantity"

The Court also referenced procedural mandates under Sections 84, 209, 269, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS to govern the conditions of the bail and consequences of non-compliance

The Court evaluated the necessity of continued detention against the material facts of the case.

It noted that the quantity of Tramadol seized (131.76 grams) falls within the "intermediate" category, which does not trigger the stringent limitations on bail found in Section 37 of the NDPS Act

The Court observed that since the charge sheet had already been filed, further custodial interrogation was not required

Furthermore, the Court placed significant weight on the principle of parity, noting that a co-accused in the same crime had already been granted bail in MCRC No. 333/2026

Considering the applicant’s lack of criminal antecedents and his duration of incarceration since October 2025, the Court reasoned that the conclusion of the trial would take considerable time, justifying the applicant's release

The Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail based on the intermediate quantity of the contraband, the filing of the charge sheet, and the principle of parity

The release was made subject to several conditions: the applicant must not seek adjournments when witnesses are present, must appear on all trial dates (subject to Section 269 BNS), and must be present for framing of charges and recording of statements (Section 351 BNSS)

Failure to comply would authorize the trial court to initiate proceedings under Section 209 of the BNS