The requirement for written communication of grounds of arrest established in Mihir Rajesh Shah is prospective and does not apply to arrests made prior to the judgment date. Bail for commercial quantities under the NDPS Act remains strictly governed by the conditions of Section 37.

G. Satapathy, J.

1. This is a bail application U/S.483 of BNSS by the petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Baunsuni PS Case No.154 of 2024 corresponding to Special Case (NDPS) No.91 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Boudh for commission of offence punishable U/S.20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, on the main allegation of possessing 100 Kgs of Contraband Ganja in a bushy field near village road of village Udubilika.

2. Heard, Ms. Anindita Bisoi, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Mr. C. Mahanty, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record.

3. The only ground that was taken by the learned counsel for the Petitioners for grant of bail to the petitioners is for non-communication of written grounds of arrest to the Petitioners, but the present case relates back to an FIR registered on 20.10.2024 and the arrest thereon was made on that day. In the context of communicating of written grounds of arrest, this Court considers it profitable to refer to the decision of Mihir Rajesh Shah Vrs. State of Maharashtra; (2026) 1 SCC 500, wherein the Apex Court in paragraph-67 and 68 has observed as under:-

“67 . After having come to the above conclusion, it is pertinent to note that the provision of law under Section 50 of CrPC (Section 47 of BNSS 2023) does not provide for a specific mode of or time frame for communication of the grounds of arrest to the person arrested. This Court in Prabir Purkayastha vs. State (NCT of Delhi); (2024) 8 SCC 254 held that the grounds of arrest be conveyed to the arrestee in writing in all offences at the earliest, which means it need not be given at the time of arrest but within a reasonable time thereafter, for offences under all the statutes, which period would be as has been laid down above in this order.

68 . We are cognizant that there existed no consistent or binding requirement mandating written communication of the grounds of arrest for all the offences . Holding as above, in our view, would ensure implementation of the constitutional rights provided to an arrestee as engrafted under Article 22 of the Constitution of India in an effective manner. Such clarity on obligation would avoid uncertainty in the administration of criminal justice. The ends of fairness and legal discipline therefore demand that this procedure as affirmed above shall govern arrests henceforth .”

4. The very use of word henceforth itself is indicative of the communication of written grounds of arrest to be applied prospectively from the date of judgment of Mihir Rajesh Shah(supra) which was rendered on 06.11.2025, but the Petitioners herein were arrested on 20.10.2024. Besides, the Petitioners had not in fact raised any objection at the time of their forwarding or subsequently thereafter, as to how they were prejudiced, if the written grounds of arrest was not communicated to them. The law that was postulated earlier mandates that the grounds of arrest must be communicated to the arrestee by the Arresting Officer and in fact, there is no plea by the Petitioners that they were not communicated with any grounds of arrest, rather their plea is for non-furnishing of written grounds of arrest. In the aforesaid circumstances and taking into account the law laid down by the Apex Court in Mihir Rajesh Shah(supra), the plea as advanced for the Petitioners merits no consideration.

5. Even otherwise, the Petitioners were allegedly found in possession of 100 Kgs of Contraband Ganja, which is much more than commercial quantity, but Grant or Refusal of bail for commission of offence under NDPS Act involving commercial quantity is governed by Sec. 37 of NDPS Act which prescribes satisfaction of the Court on two points; (i) the accused is not guilty of the offence and (ii) the accused is unlikely to commit offence while on bail. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstance and on going through the materials placed on record, this Court does not f