Regular bail granted for intermediate NDPS quantity absent criminal antecedents and on grounds of parity.

On January 18, 2026, acting on secret information, police at Ratanpur intercepted three individuals on Jali–Nevrasa Road.

A search resulted in the recovery of 14 packets of Ganja weighing 14.336 kilograms, valued at approximately Rs. 1,40,000/-, allegedly from the possession of the applicant and co-accused.

Additionally, a motorcycle used in the commission of the offense was seized from the applicant.

The applicant was arrested on January 18, 2026, and charged under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The applicant moved for regular bail, arguing false implication, non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act, lack of criminal antecedents, and the fact that the charge-sheet had already been filed.

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the quantity of contraband seized and the period of incarceration.

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail.

Sections 20(b) (punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis) and 29 (punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985.

Statutory distinction between "commercial quantity" and "intermediate quantity" under the NDPS Act, noting that 14.336 kg of Ganja falls below the commercial threshold.

The Court noted that the total quantity seized (14.336 kg) was less than the commercial quantity (20 kg), which reduces the rigors of the twin conditions usually associated with Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

The Court observed that the applicant had no prior criminal record.

The Court applied the principle of parity, noting that a co-accused, Jaikishan Sut @ Deepak Sarthi, had already been granted bail in a related application (MCRC No. 2693 of 2026).

The Court considered the procedural status of the case, highlighting that the charge-sheet had been filed and the trial was expected to be protracted, thus making further pre-trial detention unnecessary.

The High Court allowed the bail application and ordered the applicant to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions: an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments, mandatory presence at trial dates, and compliance with Section 209 and 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) regarding appearance and misuse of liberty.