Court grants bail under NDPS Act due to lack of antecedents and investigation completion.

ORDER

This petition seeking regular bail has been filed by the first and second accused in O.R. No.163/2025 of Excise Range Office, Ernakulam, registered, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 20 (b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).

2. The prosecution allegation is that on 11.11.2025, at 07:55 p.m. the accused were found possessing 1.96 kg of ganja for the purpose of sale in contravention of the provisions of the NDPS Act and thereby committed the aforementioned offences.

3. I heard the learned counsels appearing for both sides and perused the available records.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegation levelled against the petitioners is absolutely false. According to him, no contraband was actually recovered from the possession of the petitioners, and they were falsely implicated in this case on the basis of some surmises and conjectures. The learned counsel urged that the investigation in this case is practically over, and hence, further judicial incarceration of the petitioners is unwarranted and will serve no purpose.

5. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application by highlighting the serious nature of the offence alleged against the petitioners.

6. The allegation that the petitioners possessed ganja, regardless of the prohibition contained under the NDPS Act, cannot be viewed lightly. A perusal of the records reveals that the accusation against the petitioners is prima facie well-founded. The petitioners were allegedly caught red-handed with 1.096 kg of ganja on 11.11.2025, and since then, they have been in custody. The investigation in this case appears to have progressed substantially and is now on the verge of completion. It is also pertinent to note that no criminal antecedents are pointed out against the petitioners. As the investigation has crossed its major and crucial part, further judicial incarceration of the petitioners would serve no purpose. Moreover, the quantity of ganja seized in this case is just above small quantity and will certainly fall under intermediate quantity. Therefore, the rigour contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for the grant of bail is not applicable in this case. Hence, having regard to the days of detention already undergone by the petitioners and the present stage of investigation, I am inclined to grant bail to them subject to the following conditions;

1. The petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-

(Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

2. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. for a period of three months or until the final report is filed, whichever occurs first.

3. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

4. The petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court.

5. The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.

6. If the petitioners violate any of the above conditions, the investigating officer is at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of bail before the jurisdictional court, and if such an application is filed, the jurisdictional court can pass appropriate orders notwithstanding the fact that this order is one passed by this Court.

Sd/-