The court's ruling establishes that procedural adherence and the nature of the seized substance are critical in bail considerations under NDPS Act.

ORDER

This Crl.P. is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to enlarge them on bail in Crime No.130/2022 of Gokul Road Police Station, Hubbali, registered for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act ,1985.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for respondent-State and perused the material on record.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the PSI of Gokul Road Police Station received a credible information on 27.08.2022 at about 12.30 p.m. that two persons are selling ganja near Dollars colony in Gokul road, Hubballi. He went to the spot and noticed two persons aged about 20-25 years on a public road situated behind Gokul garden in Dollars colony and one of the said person was holding a blue colour bag. Confirming that they were selling ganja to the general public, he asked a Police Constable to watch them and returned to the Police Station and lodged a complaint on the basis of which the aforementioned case was registered. Thereafter, he went along with his staff, panch witnesses and ACP to the spot and apprehended both the accused. On search, it was found that they were in possession of ganja weighing 2 Kgs 96 grams. The same was seized under a mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses.

4. It is alleged that the accused were in possession of 2Kgs 96 grams of ganja and they were selling the same to the general public and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act ,1985.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that the petitioners are innocent and entire allegations are false. She contends that even according to the prosecution, credible information was received at about 12.30 noon and it is highly impossible that the accused were present till 2.30 p.m. selling ganja to the general public. She contends that the ganja alleged to have been seized is not a commercial quantity. Therefore, Section 37 of NDPS Act is not applicable. She contends that petitioners are falsely implicated and they are in judicial custody from 27.08.2022. Now, the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. Petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to allow the petition.

6. Learned HCGP has contended that the offence committed by the petitioners is heinous in nature and petitioners are habitual offenders who are involved in similar offences. Hence, if they are enlarged on bail, they may once again commit similar offence. Therefore, prays to reject the petition.

7. According to the prosecution, credible information was received at about 12.30 noon that two persons are involved in selling ganja to the general public. It is stated that at that time, the complainant namely the PSI of Gokul Road Police Station was on patrolling duty and he went to the spot and saw two persons holding a blue colour bag and therefore he suspected that they were selling ganja to the general public. He is said to have deputed one Police Constable to watch them and returned to the Police station and went along with his staff and panch witnesses to the spot at about 2.30 p.m and apprehended those two accused persons.

8. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the entire allegations are false and petitioners are falsely implicated. It is contended that it is difficult to believe that till the Police returned to the spot, even after two hours, accused were present at the spot.

9. According to the prosecution, 2Kgs 96 grams of ganja was seized from the possession of the accused. Ganja seized is not a commercial quantity. It is contended that while conducting seizure panchanama, the procedures c