HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Deva - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
CRLMB / 2989 / 2025
Decided On : 11-03-2025
(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 20, and 37 - Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. - Petitioner arrested for cultivating ganja plants - Prosecution claims recovery above commercial quantity - Court finds that actual weight of ganja below commercial limit due to improper weighing - Section 37 embargo not applicable as offence does not involve commercial quantity - Bail granted with conditions. (Paras 3, 8, 11, 13)
(B) Bail - Grant of bail for NDPS offences - Section 37 prohibits bail for commercial quantity offences, but not applicable here - Precedent from Kallu Nath case supports bail grant in similar circumstances. (Paras 11, 12)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was arrested for cultivating ganja plants on his agricultural field, with the prosecution claiming the quantity exceeded commercial limits. The petitioner contended that the recovery was improperly weighed and thus should not attract the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the actual weight of the recovered ganja was below the commercial quantity due to improper weighing methods, thus allowing bail.
Issues: The main issues were whether the recovered quantity constituted a commercial quantity and the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the improper weighing of ganja plants meant the actual quantity was below the commercial limit, thus allowing bail despite the NDPS Act's restrictions.
Result: Bail application allowed.
Order :
This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C . has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.23/2025 registered at Police Station Nithuwa district Dungarpur, for the offence under Sections 8/20 of NDPS.
2. As per the prosecution, acting upon a secret information, a team of Police Station Nithuwa raided the field belonging to the present petitioner situated adjacent to his house and found ganja plants growing therein. The petitioner was arrested on the spot.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that the recovery of the contraband was of ganja plants growing on the agricultural field, thus, conscious possession of the petitioner cannot be deduced. It was also submitted that as the whole plants were weighed without removing the stems, roots, leaves etc., the said recovery amounts to an offence under section 20 (a) of NDPS act for which no commercial quantity has been prescribed. Therefore, the embargo contained under Section 37 would not be attracted.
4. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody; no case of similar nature is pending against the petitioner; the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to conclude, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was cultivating ganja plants in his fields and the quantity of the recovered plants is well above the commercial limit specified for contraband ganja.
8. The notification in effect that specifies small and commercial quantity for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances is S.O. 1055 (E) dated 19th October, 2001 published in the Gazette of India, Extra., Pt. II Sec. 3 (ii) dated 19th October, 2001 and the commercial quantity specified therein for ganja is 20 kgs. For the purpose of determining the total weight of the recovered contraband ganja in the present case, the whole plants were taken into consideration, including the seeds, roots, stems and leaves, along with the soil as well whereas only the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plants should have been taken for weighing of contraband ganja as per the defining clause under NDPS Act. As there was no bifurcation of seeds and leaves from the flowering or fruiting tops before weighing the recovered contraband. Thus, it is safe to infer that the actual weight of recovered ganja would be less than the claimed weight and therefore, below the stipulated commercial quantity.
9. The cultivation of "any cannabis plant" is prohibited and made an offence under sub-clause (b) of Section 8 of the NDPS Act. Further, it is imperative to mention Section 20 of the NDPS Act, which discusses the punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis. Section 20 of the NDPS Act reads as follows:-
“20. Punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis.-
Whoever, in contravention of any provisions of this Act or any rule or order made or condition of licence granted thereunder,-
(a) cultivates any cannabis plant; or
(b) produces, manufactures, possesses, sells, purchases, transports, imports inter-State, exports inter-State or uses cannabis, shall be punishable-
(i) where such contravention relates to clause (a) with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees
(ii) where such contravention relates to sub-clause (b),—
(A) and involves small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or
The court determined that improper weighing of ganja plants resulted in a quantity below the commercial limit, allowing bail despite NDPS Act restrictions.
The court determined that improper weighing of ganja plants resulted in a quantity below the commercial threshold, allowing bail despite NDPS Act restrictions.
Section 20 of N.D.P.S. Act reads as punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis.
Point of Law : Police has filed this charge-sheet for cultivation of cannabis plants as also possession of Ganja, if it failed to prove at the time of trial, if at all they are able to prove, that to....
The court ruled that restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply when no defined quantity for commercial classification exists, allowing bail.
The definition of Ganja excludes leaves and seeds when not accompanied by flowering tops, affecting bail eligibility under the NDPS Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.