The court reaffirmed that bail under the NDPS Act for commercial quantities requires demonstrating reasonable grounds for innocence, emphasizing societal interests over individual liberties.

ORDER :

1. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State of Gujarat.

1.1 The present third successive bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “ BNSS ”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11210070240784 of 2024 registered with Bhestan Police Station, District Surat for the offence under Sections 8 (c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act”).

2. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned APP for respondent – State of Gujarat.

3. Case of the prosecution is that officers of DCB Police Station on the basis of secret information, caught the accused No.1 Nirmit Krishnakumar Jadeja (present applicant), who was carrying illegally Mephedrone Drugs, weighing 80.26 Grams, valued at Rs.8,02,600/- and upon further enquiry, it was learnt that the said quantity of MD drugs was supplied by one Jay Makwana (accused No.3) at the instance of accused Babu (accused No.2). In this regard, FIR came to be filed. Thereafter, the statements of the police officials and other witnesses have been taken. The samples of drug was sent to FSL Gandhinagar for analysis and it was opined that, it was Mephedrone, which is included in the NDPS Act.

4. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. S.I. Nanavati assisted by learned advocate Mr. Darshit Raval appearing for the applicant has submitted that present applicant is falsely enroped in the offence. Earlier two applications seeking regular bail were filed but same were disposed of as withdrawn as the Court was not inclined and liberty was reserved to file fresh application if the trial does not progress substantially. Hence, the applicant has approached this Court by way of present third successive application. Further, he has submitted that out of 40 witnesses, only 4 witnesses have been examined. Present applicant was found in the possession of said contraband but said contraband was for his personal consumption. He has not indulged in any illegal activity or drug trafficking. Present applicant has purchased the said contraband for his personal use. As per the case of prosecution, from one Wasim, who is yet to be arrested, one Shri Krishna Ghanshyam Swane had purchased the contraband through Aditya and from Jay he had purchased the said contraband. Other two co-accused are released by the coordinate Bench and hence, on the ground of parity, the applicant is required to be released on regular bail as allegation against the applicant is only of consumption. Co-accused Ronak from whom present applicant had purchased the contraband is already released on bail and hence, has requested to extend the benefit of parity. Even otherwise, the commencement of trial will take its own time and except confessional statement at the time of raid, no any material is collected. Hence, in absence of any material and there being no past antecedent, he has requested to allow the present application on the ground of delay. Further, present applicant is not a supplier and no further evidence is required to be collected from the present applicant. Hence, question of applicability of rigors of section 37 of the NDPS also does not arise as contraband was for personal use and consumption. Even, considering the delay in trial, he has requested to allow the present application.

5. Learned APP has opposed the present applicant on the ground that present applicant is not entitled for the benefit of parity. Present applicant was found in conscious possession of the contraband