Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material available on record.

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner Ravi @ Ravikant who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.37/2016, Police Station Tibbi, District Hanumangarh for offence under Section 8/21, 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the net weight of psychotropic salt in the recovered Alprazolam tablets is only 2500 mg. which would bring the total weight of the recovered contraband within the purview of small quantity. Thus, he urges that the petitioner deserves to be released on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He urges that as per the notification dated 18.11.2009 issued by the Government of India under the N.D.P.S. Act, the percentage of the psychotropic content cannot be isolated and the gross weight of the tablet has to be accepted while assessing the weight of the recovered contraband. He submits that the total weight of the recovered Alprazolam tablets is 750 grams which is well above the commercial quantity and thus, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail.

Heard and considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. The petitioner was found in illegal possession of 5000 Alprazolam tablets, the gross weight whereof was 750 grams. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Sahabuddin & Anr. Vs. State of Assam reported in 2012(11) JT 310 considered a similar argument and held as below :-

“10. At the very outset, the abovesaid submission of the Learned Counsel is liable to be rejected, inasmuch as, the conduct of the Appellants in having transported huge quantity of 347 cartons containing 100 bottles in each carton of 100 ml. Phensedyl cough syrup and 102 cartons, each carton containing 100 bottles of 100 ml. Recodex cough syrup without valid documents for such transportation cannot be heard to state that he was not expected to fulfill any of the statutory requirements either under the provisions of Drugs & Cosmetics Act or under the provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act.

11. It is not in dispute that each 100 ml. bottle of Phensedyl cough syrup contained 183.15 to 189.85 mg. of codeine phosphate and the each 100 ml. bottle of Recodex cough syrup contained 182.73 mg. of codeine phosphate. When the Appellants were not in a position to explain as to whom the supply was meant either for distribution or for any licensed dealer dealing with pharmaceutical products and in the absence of any other valid explanation for effecting the transportation of such a huge quantity of the cough syrup which contained the narcotic substance of codeine phosphate beyond the prescribed limit, the application for grant of bail cannot be considered based on the above submissions made on behalf of the Appellants.

12. The submission of the Learned Counsel for the Appellants was that the content of the codeine phosphate in each 100 ml. bottle if related to the permissible dosage, namely, 5 ml. would only result in less than 10 mg. of codeine phosphate thereby would fall within the permissible limit as stipulated in the Notifications dated 14.11.1985 and 29.1.1993. As rightly held by the High Court, the said contention should have satisfied the twin conditions, namely, that the contents of the narcotic substance should not be more than 100 mg. of codeine, per dose unit and with a concentration of not more than 2.5% in undivided preparation apart from the other condition, namely, that it should be only for therapeutic practice. Therapeutic practice as per dictionary meaning means 'contributing to cure of disease'. In other words, the Assessment of codeine content on dosage basis can only be made only when the cough syrup is definitely kept or transported which is exclusively meant for its usage for curing a disease