Stringent Section 37 Conditions Bar Bail for Alleged Inter-State Drug Syndicate Involving Huge Commercial Quantities

On June 8, 2025, police seized a truck containing 14 quintals and 44 kilograms of Doda (poppy straw) near the RTO barrier in Basantpur.

The driver, Deepa Ram, absconded but later memorandum statements from the vehicle owner and subsequent arrestees implicated applicants Mithun Munda, Raj Munda, and Uttam Roy in an organized trafficking network operating between Ranchi and Rajasthan.

Uttam Roy was identified through Call Detail Records (CDR) and location tracking, while Mithun and Raj Munda were named by co-accused Sahil Anil Sanga as participants in financial transactions related to the trade.

The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, arguing false implication, lack of physical possession, and parity with a co-accused who was granted bail.

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS (formerly Section 439 CrPC) despite the statutory rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

2. Whether the lack of direct physical possession and the grant of bail to a co-accused on medical grounds constitute sufficient grounds to bypass the commercial quantity restrictions under the NDPS Act.

Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, which mandates that for commercial quantities, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit further offences while on bail.

Sections 15(C), 25, and 29 of the NDPS Act regarding the possession, use of vehicles, and abetment/criminal conspiracy in trafficking commercial quantities.

The Court also considered the evidentiary value of memorandum statements coupled with corroborative technical evidence like Call Detail Records (CDR) and mobile location data.

The Court rejected the applicants' contention that the absence of physical possession or the reliance on memorandum statements warranted bail. It reasoned that the "commercial quantity" involved—14.44 quintals—triggered the stringent requirements of Section 37, shifting the burden to the applicants to demonstrate a prima facie case of innocence.

The Court noted that the investigation yielded corroborative material, specifically CDR and location data, which connected the applicants to an organized crime network.

Regarding parity, the Court clarified that the co-accused Raju Singh was granted bail solely due to a severe "kidney ailment," which did not equate to the applicants' circumstances.

The Court concluded that the magnitude of the contraband and the evidence of a systematic nexus in trafficking outweighed the delay in trial or the period of judicial custody.

It held that the involvement of the applicants in an organized crime involving a massive commercial quantity of narcotics precluded the grant of bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

The Court issued a directive to the Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh, to ensure the presence of prosecution witnesses to prevent further trial delays.