Regular bail granted in NDPS case involving ganja below commercial quantity after charge-sheet filing.

The applicants—Vijay Ekka, Hem Sagar Yadav and Parmeshwar Yadav—were arrested in connection with Crime No. 214/2026 registered at Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, District Raigarh, for offences under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”).

Acting on secret information, the police conducted a raid and allegedly seized 18.100 kilograms of ganja from the applicants’ joint possession.

The applicants claimed false implication, disputed joint possession, alleged non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act, and submitted that they had no NDPS antecedents, the charge-sheet had been filed, and they had remained in custody since 6 May 2026.

The State opposed bail on the ground that 18.100 kilograms of ganja had been recovered from the applicants’ joint possession.

1. Whether the applicants were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act involving alleged recovery of 18.100 kilograms of ganja.

2. Whether the filing of the charge-sheet, absence of prior NDPS antecedents, period of custody, and the fact that the recovered quantity was less than commercial quantity justified grant of 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 Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act, which respectively penalise unlawful possession, production, sale or transport of cannabis and criminal conspiracy or abetment in relation to NDPS offences.

The Court treated the quantity of 18.100 kilograms of ganja as less than commercial quantity and relied on the general bail considerations of the filing of the charge-sheet, absence of criminal antecedents, the period already spent in custody, and the likelihood of delay in conclusion of trial.

After examining the case diary and hearing both sides, the Court found that the alleged recovery was below commercial quantity, thereby treating the stringent commercial-quantity considerations under the NDPS Act as inapplicable.

The Court further considered that the charge-sheet had already been filed, the applicants had no criminal antecedents, they had been in custody since 6 May 2026, and the trial was likely to take considerable time.

On the cumulative assessment of these circumstances, the Court held that the applicants had made out a case for regular bail, without finally determining the disputed questions concerning joint possession or alleged non-compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act.

The Court directed that Vijay Ekka, Hem Sagar Yadav and Parmeshwar Yadav be released on bail upon furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.

The release was subject to conditions requiring them not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court on each date either personally or through counsel, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of their statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.

The order also authorised appropriate proceedings in the event of misuse of bail or failure to appear pursuant to proclamation.