Stringent bail conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act may be relaxed if procedural lapses, such as improper inventory certification and failure to send all recovered samples for FSL analysis, create reasonable doubt regarding the quantity of contraband recovered.

1. Mr. Sachin Panwar, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the State.

3. The present applicant ‘Govinda’ S/o Shri Kashmira Nath is praying for bail in reference to First Information Report dated 18.02.2026 bearing FIR No. 37 of 2026 P.S. Bahadarabad, District Haridwar, wherein, the present applicant has been implicated along with one Suraj for the offence punishable under section 8/20 of NDPS Act .

4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the alleged contraband of “Ganja”, which is shown to be recovered, is commercial one i.e. 21.560 kgs. from three packets but only one packet was sent to the FSL.

5. Apart from this, he submits that at the time of search and seizure though the inventory was prepared but have not been properly certified since there is only an endorsement of ‘seen’, which is not in conformity with the Rules of 2022 and, as such, there is no substantial compliance of section 52A of NDPS Act . Apart from this, he submits that there is one previous case of NDPS Act but he has admitted his guilt and he has been sentenced for the period of undergone with the fine of Rs. 10,000/- and released.

6. He submits that since the alleged contraband of “Ganja”, which is shown to be recovered is commercial one, therefore, section 37 will come in to the way and since the inventory so prepared was not certified by the Magistrate in conformity with the Rules of 2022 and there is no substantial compliance of section 52A and furthermore there is a doubt with regard to the quantity of contraband recovered since two packets were not sent to the FSL, therefore, whether the alleged contraband is commercial one or not this is though it is a subject matter of trial but may be considered while applicant is seeking bail.

7. He further submits that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 18.02.2026 and taking into consideration that in one another case he has been though convicted but with the fine and the period which he has served in jail and in the present one admittedly the inventory is not certified in the manner as prescribed in the Rules of 2022 and there is a doubt about the quantity since two samples were not sent to the FSL and, as such, the stringent condition of section 37 may be dispensed with on this account.

8. On the other side, Mr. Sandhu submits that there is full compliance of section 52 A of the NDPS Act and whether the certification of inventory is in terms of the Rules or not this is completely a subject matter of trial.

9. After hearing the submission of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the present applicant is languishing in jail since 18.02.2026 and the conditions as stipulated under section 37 of the NDPS Act can be relaxed particularly when there is a serious doubt about the quantity of the contraband so recovered since the two packets has not been sent for FSL, this court is of the view that the applicant deserve for bail.

10. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant ‘Govinda’ be released on bail on furnishing his personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the