Regular bail granted under the NDPS Act where recovered ganja was below commercial quantity.

Police Station Ambikapur registered Crime No. 380/2026 against Naresh Soni and a co-accused under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, alleging recovery of 3.360 kg of ganja from their joint possession following a raid based on secret information.

The applicant was arrested on 6 June 2026 and contended that he had been falsely implicated, that the contraband was not recovered from his joint possession, and that Section 42 of the NDPS Act had not been complied with.

The charge-sheet had been filed, and the applicant asserted that he had no antecedents under the NDPS Act and that the trial would take considerable time.

The State opposed bail on the ground that the ganja had been recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and the co-accused.

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act involving recovery of 3.360 kg of ganja.

Whether the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s custody since 6 June 2026, absence of NDPS antecedents, and the fact that the quantity recovered 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.

The Court applied Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act, concerning offences relating to cannabis/ganja.

The Court treated the recovery of a quantity below the notified commercial quantity as a relevant factor in assessing bail eligibility and also considered the filing of the charge-sheet, the period of custody, the likely delay in conclusion of trial, and the absence of NDPS-related criminal antecedents.

No judicial precedent was cited or relied upon in the order.

The Court considered the prosecution’s allegation of joint possession but found that the recovered quantity of 3.360 kg of ganja was less than commercial quantity.

Since the charge-sheet had already been filed, further custodial investigation was not shown to be necessary.

The Court also took into account the applicant’s custody since 6 June 2026, his lack of antecedents under the NDPS Act, and the likelihood that the trial would take time.

On the cumulative assessment of these circumstances, the Court concluded that continued detention was not warranted and that the applicant could be released subject to appropriate safeguards.

Naresh Soni was directed to be released on bail in Crime No. 380/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

The Court imposed conditions requiring him not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court as directed, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement 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.