NDPS Act – Bail – Non-commercial quantity Where the seized contraband is not of commercial quantity, rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted, and the bail application has to be considered on ordinary parameters governing bail. (Para 3)

1. NDPS Act – Bail – Non-commercial quantity

Where the seized contraband is not of commercial quantity, rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted, and the bail application has to be considered on ordinary parameters governing bail.
(Para 3)

---

2. NDPS Act – Possession of Ganja – Quantity

Allegation of possession and transportation of 10 kilograms of ganja, falling below commercial quantity, is a relevant factor favouring grant of bail.
(Para 3)

---

3. Bail – Stage of Investigation – Completion of Substantial Investigation

When a substantial portion of the investigation is completed, material witnesses are examined, and no custodial interrogation is sought, continued detention of the accused is not justified.
(Paras 3–4)

---

4. Bail – Custody Period

Long incarceration of the accused (about 92 days in judicial custody) without progress warranting further detention weighs in favour of granting bail.
(Para 3)

---

5. Bail – Tampering with Evidence – Official Witnesses

Where the examined witnesses are official and material witnesses, the apprehension of threatening witnesses or tampering with evidence is minimal.
(Para 3)

---

6. Bail – Fixed Place of Residence

Permanent residence and fixed abode of the accused reduce the likelihood of absconding and favour grant of bail with appropriate conditions.
(Para 4)

---

7. Bail – Criminal Antecedents – Effect

Mere existence of criminal antecedents or pendency of similar cases, by itself, is not a valid ground to deny bail, in the absence of other compelling circumstances.
(Para 5)

---

8. Bail – Presumption of Innocence

Accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and bail cannot be denied as a matter of punishment at the pre-trial stage.
(Para 5)

---

9. Bail – Imposition of Stringent Conditions

Even in NDPS cases involving non-commercial quantity, the Court can safeguard investigation by imposing stringent and appropriate conditions while granting bail.
(Paras 6–7)

---

ANALYSIS

Nature of Allegations

The petitioners were accused of being in possession and transportation of 10 kilograms of ganja, attracting offences under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. The Court specifically noted that the seized quantity does not constitute commercial quantity.

Stage of Investigation

The Court recorded that:

• Seven witnesses were already examined,

• All of them were material and official witnesses,

• A substantial portion of the investigation concerning the petitioners was completed,

• No application seeking custodial interrogation was filed,

• The statutory window for custodial interrogation had expired.

These factors collectively indicated that further incarceration was unnecessary.

Custodial Period

The petitioners were in judicial custody for 92 days. The Court treated prolonged custody without investigative necessity as a relevant factor favouring bail.

Likelihood of Absconding or Tampering

The petitioners were permanent residents of Kerala with fixed abode. The Court found no reasonable apprehension that they would:

• Abscond,

• Tamper with evidence, or

• Hamper the investigation.

Criminal Antecedents

Though the prosecution pointed out prior adverse antecedents, the Court relied upon settled law that mere pendency of criminal cases cannot, by itself, justify denial of bail, particularly when other bail parameters favour release.

Balancing Liberty and Investigation

The Court balanced:

• The right to personal liberty,

• Presumption of innocence, and

• The interest of investigation,

by granting bail with strict reporting and movement restrictions, thereby protecting the prosecution’s interests.

---

RATIO DECIDENDI

In prosecutions under the NDPS Act involving non-commercial quantity, where substantial investigation is completed, official witnesses are examined, custodial interrogation is no longer required, and prolonged detention has occurred, bail should be granted subject to stringent conditions; mere criminal antecedents or pendency of similar cases is not, by itself, a sufficient ground to deny bail.