Supreme Court Grants Bail to Three Accused in 137 kg Ganja Case, Extending Co-Accused's Bail

Published: 29 October 2026 · NyayVidhan

The Supreme Court has granted bail to three accused, in custody since 24.02.2026, in a Chhattisgarh NDPS case with eight accused and 137 kilograms of contraband seized. It extended to them the benefit of its order of 16.09.2026 granting bail to a co-accused, which had noted that the contraband was not apportioned between the accused although the commercial quantity of ganja is twenty kilograms or more. The High Court's refusal of bail was set aside (paras 6, 8-11).

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Three Accused in 137 kg Ganja Case, Extending Co-Accused's Bail

Judgment Intelligence

Bail Granted

Narotam Behera & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh

Criminal Appeal No. 5057 of 2026 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 18661 of 2026)

Court: Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision: 27 October 2026
Bench: Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar
Relevant Acts & Sections: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29(1)

Final Outcome

Appeal allowed and bail granted: the High Court's order of 12.05.2026 set aside; the appellants to be produced before the jurisdictional Special Court within 7 days and released on bail on such terms as may be deemed appropriate; pending applications disposed of (paras 10-13).

Source Supreme Court of India, www.sci.gov.in — order dated 27.10.2026

View PDF View Full Judgment Text

Key holdings

The benefit of the Supreme Court's order of 16.09.2026 granting bail to a co-accused was extended to the three appellants (paras 8-9).
That order noted eight accused, a total seizure of 137 kilograms and no apportionment of the contraband between them, relevant as the commercial quantity of ganja is twenty kilograms or more (para 8).
It also noted other co-accused already on bail and a charge-sheet filed, with charges not yet framed (para 8).
The appellants are to be produced before the jurisdictional Special Court within 7 days and released on bail; they must appear on every hearing date unless exempted (para 11).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

The appellants, Narotam Behera, Shiv Sahu and Shushil Kumar Sahu, are accused in Crime No. 20/2026 of Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29(1) of the NDPS Act (paras 3, 5). Arrested on 24.02.2026, they have been in custody since then (para 6). On 12.05.2026 the Chhattisgarh High Court rejected their regular bail application (para 4). Earlier, on 16.09.2026, the Supreme Court had granted bail to a co-accused (para 8). Notice in the appellants' case was issued on 21.09.2026, and the State filed a counter affidavit (para 7).

Court's Findings

The order rests on the co-accused's bail. The Court reproduced paragraphs 8 and 9 of its order of 16.09.2026 (para 8). That order had found eight accused in all and a total seizure of 137 kilograms, with no apportionment of the contraband between the accused as of then, a point it treated as relevant because the commercial quantity of ganja is twenty kilograms or more. It also noted that other co-accused had already been enlarged on bail and that the investigation was complete and a charge-sheet filed, though charges had not been framed. On due consideration, the Court held that the same benefit may be extended to the appellants as well (para 9), and set aside the High Court's order of 12.05.2026 (para 10). The order records the State's counter affidavit without setting out its contents (para 7), and records custody since 24.02.2026 without comment (para 6). It does not discuss Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the material against each appellant or any decided case.

Legal Principle

Bail granted by the Supreme Court to one co-accused in an NDPS case, on the footing that the 137 kilograms seized had not been apportioned between the eight accused while the commercial quantity of ganja begins at twenty kilograms, was extended to three other accused on the same basis (paras 8-9).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

For accused in a multi-accused NDPS seizure, this order shows how a co-accused's bail can be carried over: the Supreme Court extended the benefit of its earlier order without separate reasons (para 9). What that order found relevant was that the 137 kilograms had not been apportioned between the eight accused, read against the twenty-kilogram commercial quantity for ganja (para 8). Defence lawyers should place the co-accused's bail order and the state of apportionment on record. The order does not discuss Section 37 and states no general rule. Compare Mayurdan Pravindan Gadhavi and Reginamary Chellamani, Supreme Court bail rulings on commercial quantity and parity in bail.

Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.