Hydroponic Ganja: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail Even for Intermediate Quantity, Citing Higher THC and Value

The petitioners, accused nos. 1 to 3 in a Customs case under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 23(c), 28, 29, 27A and 8(c) of the NDPS Act, sought regular bail under Section 483 BNSS (para 1). They were intercepted at the airport on arrival from Bangkok, and 36.430 kg of alleged hydroponic ganja was recovered from their baggage; the Trial Court rejected bail on 27.06.2026 (para 3). They said each carried a separate trolley bag (12.550, 11.030 and 12.850 kg), each an intermediate quantity, with no material showing conspiracy (para 4). The respondent said the joint trip showed conspiracy, the 36.430 kg total was commercial, and packing under 20 kg per bag was a modus operandi to escape Section 37 (para 5).

S. Vishwajith Shetty J. noted that punishment under the NDPS Act depends on quantity, as fixed by the Central Government's notification (paras 6-7). Hydroponic ganja is not defined in the Act; Section 2(iii)(b) defines ganja as the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, by whatever name known (para 8). Cannabis contains THC, a listed psychotropic substance, and hydroponic ganja has more THC than ganja (para 9). It has about three times the THC of normal ganja and is valued much higher, but the notification does not list it, so the ganja entry at Sl. No. 55 governs punishment (para 10). The Court noticed a massive increase in such cases involving arrivals from Thailand, and recorded being told that courts were releasing accused because the quantity was not commercial (para 12). Punishment is one factor in bail but not the sole one; the interest of society is paramount, and the greater harm of hydroponic ganja cannot be overlooked, so intermediate quantity alone does not earn bail (para 13). Having travelled together and brought the three bags, the petitioners prima facie conspired and were in conscious possession; Section 29 was rightly invoked, and investigation was in progress (para 14).