Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

The Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur refused bail to an accused held on a DRI complaint under the NDPS Act over about 15.740 kg of ‘Hydroponic Weed’ allegedly carried concealed through an airport, although the defence said the quantity was below the 20 kg commercial quantity for ganja (paras 4-6). The Court relied on the substance’s reported potency and value, the ongoing investigation, Karan Mehra and Supreme Court economic-offence rulings (para 7).

The Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur refused bail to an accused charged under the NDPS Act over about 11.410 kg of ‘Hydroponic Weed’ allegedly brought from Bangkok, a quantity the defence said was below the 20 kg commercial quantity for ganja (paras 1, 4-5). Having accepted the Commissioner of Customs’ explanation for not invoking the Customs Act, the Court relied on the drug’s reported potency and value, Karan Mehra and Supreme Court economic-offence rulings (paras 3, 7).

The Rajasthan High Court refused bail to an engineering student from whose hostel room 0.31 gram of LSD on blotter papers and 6.1 gram of ganja were allegedly recovered. Taking into account that the quantity as alleged was commercial, the Section 37 NDPS bar, and a Bombay High Court Full Bench ruling that the blotter paper is part of the LSD and counts towards its weight, the Court dismissed the application without commenting on the merits (paras 3, 5-6).

The Supreme Court held that the NDPS Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal Rules, 2022 do not take away the Special Court's power to release a seized vehicle on interim custody under Sections 451 and 457 CrPC (Sections 497 and 503 BNSS). A lorry owner whose crew carried 6 kg of ganja, and who was never charged, got his vehicle back on supurdagi (paras 13-36).

The Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur refused bail to an accused held by Customs at Jaipur International Airport with 18.534 kg of what the Court treated as hydroponic weed, put by the prosecution at about ₹18 crore, although the quantity was below the commercial threshold (paras 1-3, 5-6). The Court held that the drug's potency, its high value, the sophisticated import method and possible syndicate links outweighed the usual practice of granting bail for intermediate quantities once investigation is over (para 5).

The Rajasthan High Court granted bail under Section 483 of the BNSS to an accused booked under Sections 8/20, 8/21, 8/25 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act, from whom 6.91 grams of cocaine and 4.9 grams of hybrid foreign ganja were allegedly recovered (paras 1, 7). Following Akhlak @ Vilsan, it held that recoveries effected separately from three accused cannot be combined into commercial quantity, so Section 37 did not apply, contrary to the trial court's view (para 8).

The Supreme Court set aside a Bombay High Court order sending an NDPS ganja case back for retrial because the raid video was not explained by each witness, the chemical examiner was not examined and the seized ganja was not produced. Retrial is for exceptional cases; the video had a Section 65B certificate, the analyst's report is admissible under Section 293 CrPC, and non-production is not always fatal (paras 16-34).

The Supreme Court acquitted three men convicted under Sections 25A and 29 of the NDPS Act over 1,364 kg of ephedrine seized in Ahmedabad. The presumptions under Sections 35 and 54 arise only after the prosecution proves foundational facts, and a co-accused's statement to ATS officers at his arrest has no evidentiary value. The godown lessee's conviction was affirmed, but his sentence was cut to the 8 years and 10 months already served (paras 54-73).

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to a woman accused under Sections 21, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, from whom 100 grams of heroin, an intermediate quantity, was allegedly recovered (paras 1, 14, 25). Despite the State's reliance on the total recovered from all the accused, the Court held that heroin recovered separately cannot be collectively attributed to her (para 25). Custody since 26.04.2024, a filed charge-sheet and co-accused on bail weighed for bail (paras 24-26).

The Supreme Court has acquitted a man convicted of possessing heroin, holding that two accused persons' individually recovered quantities cannot be clubbed into a 'commercial quantity' without proof of conspiracy, and that a complete failure to follow Section 52A sampling procedure left the FSL report unusable. It also held the High Court wrong to refuse the appeal over delay alone.

The Rajasthan High Court set aside a 10-year NDPS sentence in a 282 kg poppy husk case, holding that nothing linked the appellant to the vehicle or the contraband. A custodial statement by a person held in another case, which led to no fresh discovery, was barred by Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act, and a police statement the witness did not repeat on oath was not evidence (paras 6.1-6.5, 7-8).

The Supreme Court dismissed a special leave petition by a man convicted under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act for 236 vials of codeine cough syrup, but corrected the Chhattisgarh High Court's view that a sentence above the minimum needs a Section 32-B factor. Section 32-B lets courts weigh other relevant factors, such as quantity, so the minimum is not the maximum; the reduced sentence was left undisturbed (paras 9-21).