Regular bail granted in an NDPS case involving below-commercial quantity and a prolonged anticipated trial.

The applicant was arrested in Crime No. 150/2026 registered at Police Station Amanaka, Raipur, for offences under Sections 15 and 18(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

The prosecution alleged recovery of 4.432 kg of doda/poppy straw and 79.30 grams of opium from the applicant on 7 May 2026.

The applicant denied the allegations, asserting false implication, absence of conscious or exclusive possession, and that the seized substances were below commercial quantity.

The State opposed bail primarily on the ground that the charge-sheet had already been filed.

The applicant had remained in custody since 7 May 2026, had no criminal antecedents, and the charge-sheet had been filed.

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in relation to offences under Sections 15 and 18(B) of the NDPS Act.

Whether the alleged recovery of quantities below the prescribed commercial quantity, together with the applicant’s lack of criminal antecedents, period of custody, and filing of the charge-sheet, justified release on bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail.

It considered the offences under Sections 15 and 18(B) of the NDPS Act and the statutory classification of narcotic substances by quantity.

Since the alleged contraband was below commercial quantity, the stringent limitations ordinarily applicable to offences involving commercial quantity were not treated as a bar to bail.

The Court also applied the established bail considerations concerning the nature and gravity of the offence, criminal antecedents, duration of custody, filing of the charge-sheet, and the likely time required for conclusion of trial.

The Court noted that the alleged quantities—4.432 kg of doda/poppy straw and 79.30 grams of opium—were below commercial quantity.

It further considered that the applicant had no criminal antecedents, had been in custody since 7 May 2026, and that the charge-sheet had already been filed, thereby reducing the immediate risk of investigation-related interference.

Since the trial was likely to take considerable time and the State raised no substantial ground beyond the filing of the charge-sheet, the Court found it appropriate to exercise its discretion under Section 483 BNSS in favour of bail.

The High Court directed that Balram Singh be released in Crime No. 150/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Bail was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court as directed, to comply with proceedings arising from any misuse of bail, and to appear personally at the opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 BNSS.