Clubbing Question Left Open: Supreme Court Grants Bail on Completed Investigation and Over a Year in Custody

The appellant is accused in FIR No. 47/2025, Police Station Srigufwara, District Anantnag, under Sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act (para 4). A police patrol allegedly intercepted him on 15.07.2025 with 602 g of charas; after his disclosure statement two more persons were apprehended with 498 g and 318 g (para 5). The High Court at Srinagar rejected his regular bail application on 14.05.2026 (paras 3, 6). For the appellant it was said that his own quantity is far below commercial quantity, so Section 37 does not apply, and that he has been in custody since 15.07.2025 with the charge-sheet filed (para 8). The Union Territory relied on the total of more than 1 kg (para 9).

Answering the Bench's query, the Union Territory stated that charges have been framed and the matter is ready for trial (para 10). After going through the material on record, the Court held that a case for bail was made out (para 11). It expressly declined, at this stage, to enter into the controversy whether the combined recovery could be construed as a recovery against the accused jointly or severally so as to take it above commercial quantity (para 11). What decided the appeal instead was that the investigation is complete, a charge-sheet has been filed and the appellant has remained in custody for more than a year (para 11). On that position the High Court's order of 14.05.2026 was set aside (para 12). The order says nothing more: it does not rule on whether Section 37 applies, on the effect of the Section 29 allegation or on the disclosure statement, and it cites no case law (paras 11-13).