Regular bail granted for intermediate quantity of contraband under NDPS Act post-filing of charge-sheet.

On September 19, 2025, following a tip-off, police apprehended the applicant near Smriti Nagar Chowk, Durg

A search of a vehicle (Hero Pleasure No. CG-09-JB-5685) allegedly linked to the applicant resulted in the recovery of 720 tablets of SPAS-TRANCAN-PLUS (Tramadol) and 210 tablets of Nitrazepam

The applicant, a 25-year-old B.Pharmacy graduate with no criminal antecedents, was arrested and charged under Sections 22, 8(b), and 27(A) of the N.D.P.S. Act

The applicant moved this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, contending that the quantity seized was less than commercial and the charge-sheet had already been filed

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering the seized contraband is less than commercial quantity and the investigation is complete

The Court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (pertaining to the power of the High Court to grant bail)

It further interpreted the penal provisions of Sections 22, 8(b), and 27(A) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, specifically noting the legal distinction between "small," "intermediate," and "commercial" quantities of psychotropic substances, which determines the applicability of the stringent bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act

The Court observed that the seized contraband—Tramadol and Nitrazepam—amounted to more than a small quantity but remained "less than commercial quantity"

This classification is crucial as it avoids the rigorous bar on bail typically imposed by the NDPS Act for commercial quantities.

The Court noted that the applicant had been in custody since September 19, 2025, and that the filing of the charge-sheet indicated that custodial interrogation was no longer required

Furthermore, the Court took into account the applicant's lack of criminal history and the fact that the trial’s conclusion would likely be delayed

The Court balanced the seriousness of the allegations against the applicant's personal background (an educated youth with no prior record) and the procedural status of the case to conclude that further incarceration was unnecessary

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties

The Court imposed specific conditions: the applicant must not seek adjournments during evidence, must remain present for all trial dates, and must comply with procedural mandates under Sections 209, 269, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS to ensure the integrity of the trial