Section 8

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur granted bail to two men implicated with the aid of Section 29 of the NDPS Act after 167.02 grams of 'MD' was recovered from a co-accused motorcyclist (paras 3, 7, 10). Prima facie, there was no connecting evidence: no call details, no recovery from them, no naming by those on the motorcycle, and only a UPI payment, its purpose never investigated, into a third person's account (para 7). Section 37 was held satisfied (para 8).

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur refused a second bail plea over 7 kg 96 g of opium milk, a pistol and five cartridges allegedly recovered from a car at night (paras 7, 17, 19). The seizure officer's evidence showed that the tip-off, received after sunset, was written down and sent to superior officers, with reasons recorded for searching without a warrant (para 11). Following the Supreme Court, a speedy-trial plea could not dilute Section 37 (para 15).

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur granted bail to the owner of a firm supplying scientific apparatus, accused in a CBN case over 2.021 kg of MD recovered from a co-accused (paras 2, 8, 12). Prima facie, his alleged role was confined to supplying scientific apparatus in the course of his business, his bona fides could not be ruled out, and nothing was recovered from him (para 10). For the limited purpose of bail, the Court held the Section 37 twin conditions satisfied (para 11).

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur granted bail to two men accused in a case over 379.230 kg of poppy straw, a commercial quantity seized from two co-accused (paras 5, 8). Prima facie, nothing apart from the co-accused's statements connected them with the contraband: no call detail records or location details were collected, and nothing was recovered from them (paras 5-6). For the limited purpose of bail, the Court held the twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act satisfied (para 6).

The Supreme Court granted bail to a hotel owner in jail since 21.12.2023 in a Gujarat NDPS case in which the main accused was found with a commercial quantity of contraband in one of the hotel's rooms. Though his earlier special leave petition had been dismissed, the Court entertained a fresh one after the hotel's manager got bail, and released him as nothing was recovered from him and he had no criminal antecedents (paras 1-3).

The Karnataka High Court has refused regular bail to a man accused of bringing hydroponic ganja into Bengaluru from Bangkok, with 16.360 kg of a 26.230 kg seizure from three passengers attributed to him (paras 3, 6). Applying its order of 17.08.2026 in Crl.P No. 9787/2026, the Court held that the higher THC content, value and social harm of hydroponic ganja must weigh with courts, and that an intermediate quantity is not by itself a ground for bail (paras 6-7).

The Supreme Court granted bail to a man accused of possessing one kilogram of methamphetamine, after the Madras High Court had refused it. He had been in custody for almost two years, the trial had not begun though the chargesheet cites 46 witnesses, his arrest rested on co-accused statements whose worth is for the trial court, and his cardiac condition also weighed (paras 8-12). The merits and statutory safeguards were left open (para 11).

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a man accused in a customs case at Babatpur airport, Varanasi, over 3.721 kg of what the Union of India called hydroponic weed, more potent than conventional cannabis (paras 3-5). As the recovery was below commercial quantity, Section 37 NDPS rigours did not apply, and, citing Manish Sisodia, the Court said bail is not withheld as punishment (paras 6-7).

The Supreme Court granted bail to two men alleged to have run a medical store that supplied Tramadol-combination capsules (Proxyco SPAS) to co-accused caught with 878 capsules weighing 412.66 grams in a Rajasthan NDPS case. They were apprehended only on the co-accused's statement, whether they sold the contraband is a matter for trial, they had no criminal antecedents and the chargesheet had been filed, so continued custody was not warranted (paras 3-4).

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur discharged an accused charged under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act. It held that statements of co-accused recorded under Section 67 cannot be used as confessions after Tofan Singh, and that a bare allegation that the accused ‘cooperated’ in the narcotic trade, with no overt act, transaction or recovery attributed to him, does not disclose abetment or conspiracy. The ₹68,500 found on him showed no nexus with the offence (paras 9-21).

The Madras High Court at Madurai granted bail to an air passenger after eight vacuum-sealed packets of suspected hydroponic weed were allegedly found under false bottoms in his trolley bags at Trichy airport (paras 2, 6). It extracted its own order of 02.09.2026, which had refused to treat hydroponic weed as commercial quantity on an untested THC claim, and weighed the quantity, the pending chemical analysis report, his custody and the absence of previous cases (paras 5-6).

The Supreme Court has acquitted two men convicted under the NDPS Act, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the seized substance was charas. The forensic report was discarded because the chain of custody of the samples was broken, including an unexplained five-day gap, and no other admissible evidence identified the substance.