Judgment Intelligence
Bail Granted- Court
- Rajasthan High Court
- Date of Decision
- 13 March 2026
- Bench
- Justice Ravi Chirania
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 2(viia), 8, 22 and 37; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483
Bail granted: the second bail application under Section 483 BNSS was allowed; the petitioner is to be released on a personal bond of Rs 1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs 50,000, appearing on every hearing date until the trial ends (para 6), subject to the two-year cancellation direction (para 7).
Source Rajasthan High Court order dated 13 March 2026
Key holdings
- The FSL report put the recovery at exactly 50 grams of Mephedrone (MD), the figure notified for MD (paras 3, 5).
- Following Ratto v. State of Himachal Pradesh, the Court read Section 2(viia) to require a quantity greater than the notified figure (para 5).
- As the recovery was 50 grams and not more, the rigours of Section 37 were not attracted, and the second bail application was allowed (paras 5-6).
- If the petitioner is found involved in a similar case within two years, the Public Prosecutor must apply for cancellation of bail (para 7).
Case explainer by NyayVidhan: an account of this judgment and the law it laid down, not the court's text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.
Brief Facts
Court's Findings
Legal Principle
NyayVidhan's view · Practice note
Why It Matters
This short Jodhpur order applies the greater-than rule at its most exact point: the FSL report put the Mephedrone at exactly 50 grams, the figure notified for MD, and a recovery equal to that figure and not more did not attract the rigours of Section 37 (para 5). The Court went by the FSL figure, although the substance had first been described as MDMA (paras 3, 5), and it paired bail with a two-year cancellation direction to the Public Prosecutor (para 7). Sumit Vishvas v. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8297/2024, 24 September 2024) reads the definition the same way for 20 kg of ganja; our explainer traces the rule across High Courts.
Editorial comment by the NyayVidhan Editorial Desk. It is not part of the Court's judgment and is not legal advice.
Precedents Relied Upon
- Ratto Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Applied: for a quantity to be commercial quantity under Section 2(viia) of the NDPS Act it must be greater than the notified quantity; exactly 50 grams of MD, the notified figure, is not commercial quantity, so Section 37 is not attracted.
