1. Bail application for alleged possession of commercial quantity of ganja under NDPS Act, 1985. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 6535
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Neela Gokhale, J
Santosh Ratan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2360 OF 2025
Important Points
When the weight of the seized contraband in the Inventory Panchanama falls below the threshold of commercial quantity, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted, favoring the grant of bail, especially in cases of prolonged incarceration.
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) NDPS Act - Bail - Commercial Quantity vs. Intermediate Quantity - Discrepancy between the weight of contraband at the time of seizure (20.080 kgs) and the weight recorded in the Inventory Panchanama (19.949 kgs) renders the quantity intermediate; consequently, the strict rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply. (Para 4, 7, 8)
(B) Bail - Prolonged Incarceration - Where the accused has been incarcerated for two years and charges are yet to be framed, the applicant is entitled to bail, especially when the quantity of the contraband is found to be below the commercial threshold. (Para 4, 8)
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the discrepancy in the quantity of Ganja seized and the duration of his incarceration.
(B) Bail - Prolonged Incarceration - Where the accused has been incarcerated for two years and charges are yet to be framed, the applicant is entitled to bail, especially when the quantity of the contraband is found to be below the commercial threshold. (Para 4, 8)
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the discrepancy in the quantity of Ganja seized and the duration of his incarceration.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- crime and sentencing
- practice and procedure
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Puja Yadav, Rat Kamath, Sachin Tiwari
For the Respondents: Megha S. Bajoria
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Puja Yadav, Rat Kamath, Sachin Tiwari
For the Respondents: Megha S. Bajoria
Table of Contents
2. Defense argues inventory weight below commercial quantity, two-year incarceration, and no charges framed; prosecution argues commercial quantity recovered, CA report positive. (Para 4 , 5 )
3. Inventory panchanama weight of contraband (19.949 kgs) is below commercial quantity; charges not yet framed. (Para 7 )
4. When inventory weight of contraband is below commercial quantity, the rigours of Section 37, NDPS Act, may not apply. (Para 7 , 8 )
5. Applicant enlarged on bail with conditions including PR bond, monthly police attendance, and passport deposit. (Para 8 , 9 )
6. Does a slight decrease in contraband weight during inventory panchanama affect the applicability of Section 37, NDPS Act?
Yes, where the inventory weight falls below the commercial quantity threshold, the rigours of Section 37 may not apply, making bail less stringent. (Para 7 , 8 )
7. What factors are considered for bail when contraband weight is intermediate?
The court considered the intermediate quantity of contraband, the period of incarceration already undergone, and that charges were not yet framed. (Para 7 , 8 )
PC:-
1. The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with C.R. No. 879 of 2023 dated 13th September 2023 registered with Virar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, "NDPS Act"). The Applicant is the sole accused.
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that while the police were on patrolling duty on 13th September 2023, the Applicant was found in suspicious circumstances. He was stopped and intercepted. The compliances under the NDPS Act were followed. Panchas were called, panchanama was recorded and the personal search of the Applicant was undertaken in compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act. The Applicant was found to be in possession of two bags together containing 20.080 kgs of Ganja. Since the quantity was of commercial nature, the Applicant was arrested pursuant to the registration of the FIR.
3. The Applicant made an application seeking bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, Vasai. However, by order dated 17th August 2024, the said application was rejected. Hence, the Applicant is before this Court seeking the relief as prayed.
4. Ms. Pooja Yadav, learned Counsel for the Applicant, submits that the Applicant was arrested on 13th September 2023 and has suffered incarceration for two years. She submits that the charges are not yet framed. She also submits that the weight of the contraband during panchanama was recorded as 20.080 kgs. However, during the Inventory Panchanama, the weight of the contraband is recorded as 19.949 kgs, which is a non-commercial quantity. She further submits that the Inventory Panchanama thus, makes the case of the prosecution doubtful as to the weight of the contraband and hence, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not apply. She also submits that there are no antecedents pertaining to the Applicant. In these circumstances, she prays that the Applicant be released on bail.
5. Ms. Megha Bajoria, learned APP on the other hand, submits that commercial quantity of Ganja was recovered from the Applicant. She submits that the CA report is received and tendered. As per the CA report, the contraband is tested positive for Ganja. She submits that all the other compliances of the NDPS Act are followed. She thus, prays that the Bail Application be rejected.
6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the record with their assistance.
7. I have perused the FIR and the Inventory Panchanama. The Ganja seized was about 20.080 kgs. However, when the Inventory Panchanama was recorded, there was a slight decrease in the quantity of Ganja, reducing the weight to 19.949 Kgs. The said Ganja is therefore, of intermediate quantity. Also, the weight at the time of seizure was taken along with the bags containing the said Ganja. In any case, the Applicant has suffered incarceration for the past two years.
8. In view of the fact that the quantity of Ganja as recorded in the Inventory Panchanama is below the commercial quantity and the fact that the charges are not yet framed, I am inclined to enlarge the Applicant on bail on the following conditions:
ORDER
i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with one or two local sureties in the like amount;
ii) The Applicant shall attend the Police Station concerned, on first Monday of every month between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m., till the charges are framed. He shall also attend the Trial Court concerned on each and every date as directed, till the conclusion of the trial, save and except if the Applicant is exempted from appearance by orders of the Trial Court.
iii) If the Applicant has not deposited his passport, the Applicant shall deposit the same with the concerned Police Station, if any;
iv) The Applicant shall not leave India, without permission of the trial Court;
