This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under

Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for granting regular bail in FIR

No.43/2021-22/1403IE/140307 registered by Karnataka

Excise Department for the offences punishable under

Sections 15(b), 18(c), 25, 8(c) of NDPS Act.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader

appearing for the respondent-State.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on credible

information, the complainant along with the team went to

Ramdev Rajasthani Dhaba run by this petitioner and seized

3700 grams of poppy straw/opium under the panchanama

and the accused was arrested and was remanded to the

3

judicial custody. His bail application has been rejected by

the court below. Hence, he is before this Court.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that the poppy straw seized by the police is only 3.7 kgs is

intermediate quantity, but the commercial quantity is 50

kgs. He is in custody for more than two months. He is ready

to abide by any conditions imposed. Hence, he sought for

grant of bail.

5.

The learned HCGP has serisouly opposed for

grant of bail.

6.

Having heard the arguments of the learned

counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court

Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State

and perused the material available on record it reveals that

ofcourse the police have stated that the opinum/poppy

straw was recovered from the petitioner9s dhaba. The police

are not sure whether it is opium or poppy straw. If opium is

4

taken, 2.5 kgs is commercial quantity and if poppy straw is

taken,

50

kgs

is

commercial

quantity.

The

Excise

department themselves are confused whether it is opium or

poppy straw, but they have mentioned both names in the

FIR as 8opium9 in kannada and as 8poppy straw9 in English.

Therefore, it is not clear whether it is opium or poppy

straw. These two have to be read differently under the

schedule of the NDPS Act. However, the poppy straw seized

from the petitioner9s Dhaba is 3.7 kgs, which is an

intermediate quantity and it is not commercial quantity. He

is in custody for more than 2 months. The investigation is

likely to be completed in couple of weeks. He is a

permanent resident and running Dhaba at Hiriyur. Under

the circumstances, by imposing certain stringent conditions,

if bail is granted, no prejudice is caused to the case of the

prosecution. Hence, I pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused is

ordered to be released on bail in FIR No.43/2021-

5

22/1403IE/140307

registered

by

Karnataka

Excise

Department for the offences punishable under Sections

15(b), 18(c), 25, 8(c) of NDPS Act, subject to the following

conditions:

(i)

The petitioner shall execute a personal

bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Two

Lakhs only) with two sureties for the

likesum

to

the

satisfaction

of

the

jurisdictional Court and out of the two

sureties, one surety should be from

Rajasthan;

(ii)

The petitioner shall not indulge in similar

offences strictly;

(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the

prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly;

(iv) The

petitioner

shall

not

leave

the

jurisdiction without prior permission of the

Trial Court.

(v)

The petitioner shall appear before the

Investigating Officer on every Monday

6

between 10:00 am to 4:00 pm for a

period of six months or till the charge

sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DM/-