Facts
The applicant sought regular bail in FIR No. 393/2026, registered under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”).
Source reference: p. 1, para. 1The prosecution alleged that the applicant was driving a motorcycle with a co-accused when police stopped them and found a bag containing 5.140 kg of poppy straw.
Source reference: p. 1, para. 2; p. 2, para. 4The Court recorded that this was an intermediate quantity, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the applicant had no other pending case.
Source reference: p. 2, paras. 4–5Issues
1. Whether the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied to the alleged recovery of 5.140 kg of poppy straw.
Source reference: p. 2, para. 52. Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail in the circumstances of the case.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, paras. 5–8Law Applied
The Court considered Sections 15 and 29 of the NDPS Act, under which the FIR was registered, and Section 37 of the Act, which imposes additional restrictions on bail in specified cases.
Source reference: p. 1, para. 1; p. 2, para. 5It held that Section 37’s rigours were not attracted because the commercial quantity for poppy straw is 50 kg and the alleged recovery was 5.140 kg.
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5The Court also relied on *Deepak v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)*, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 9027, concerning bail in a case involving an intermediate quantity of poppy husk.
Source reference: p. 2, para. 6; p. 3, para. 7Reasoning
The alleged recovery was well below the 50 kg commercial-quantity threshold, so the Court found that Section 37’s heightened bail restrictions did not apply.
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5It further considered that the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had been filed, the quantity was intermediate, the witnesses were police officials, and the applicant had no other pending case.
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5Applying the reasoning in *Deepak*, the Court concluded that these circumstances supported release on bail.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, paras. 6–7Holding
The Court granted the applicant regular bail on a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety for the like amount, subject to conditions including travel restrictions, address and mobile-number requirements, non-contact with witnesses, court attendance, and monthly reporting to the concerned SHO.
It disposed of the petition and pending application, requested that the trial be expedited to the extent feasible, and clarified that its observations were limited to the bail application.
Source reference: p. 5, paras. 10–12Acts & Sections Cited
4 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 19854
Original Court PDF
SaleemvsState Nct Of Delhi
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
