Wednesday, 4 November 2026
Rajasthan High Court
NDPS Act

Only One of Five Bags Sampled: Rajasthan High Court Treats 19.80 kg as Contraband, Grants NDPS Bail

Published: · NyayVidhan · 3 min read

The Rajasthan High Court granted bail to an accused said to have been found with 79.400 kg of doda chura in five bags, because samples were drawn from only one bag. Only that bag, weighing 19.80 kg and below commercial quantity, could be treated as the alleged contraband (paras 4, 9-10). Following its earlier order in Hariram, the Court allowed the second bail application of an accused in custody for more than a year (paras 11-14).

Only One of Five Bags Sampled: Rajasthan High Court Treats 19.80 kg as Contraband, Grants NDPS Bail

Judgment Intelligence

Bail Granted
Sitaram alias Udham Meena v. State of Rajasthan
2026:RJ-JP:39052
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 11971/2026
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Date of Decision
25 September 2026
Bench
Justice Ganesh Ram Meena
Relevant Acts & Sections
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8, 15, 25 and 37; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 483
Final Outcome

The second bail application was allowed: the petitioner is to be released on a Rs 1,00,000 personal bond with two Rs 50,000 sureties to the trial court's satisfaction, and to appear on all dates. The prosecution may seek cancellation if he is involved in a similar case (paras 14-15).

Source Rajasthan High Court, hcraj.nic.in — order dated 25 September 2026

Key holdings

  1. Only bag 'C', from which the two samples were drawn, could be treated as the alleged contraband; the other four bags were not sampled (para 10).
  2. At 19.80 kg the sampled bag was below commercial quantity, though the five bags together weighed 79.400 kg (paras 4, 10).
  3. The Court followed its earlier order in Hariram v. State of Rajasthan, which drew on the Supreme Court bail order in Puranmal Jat (para 11).
  4. With more than a year in custody, the second bail application was allowed without any opinion on the merits (paras 12-14).

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

Brief Facts

The petitioner was arrested in an FIR registered at Police Station Harnavda Shahji, Baran district, under Sections 8, 15 and 25 of the NDPS Act; his first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 8 May 2026 (paras 1, 3). The doda chura allegedly recovered from him on 31 May 2025 was packed in five bags, A to E, weighing 79.400 kg in all (paras 4, 9). His counsel said that only the sampled bag 'C', weighing 19.80 kg, could be treated as contraband, so Section 37 did not apply (paras 5-6). The Public Prosecutor replied that the other bags seemed to hold the same material and that the total exceeded commercial quantity (para 8).

Court's Findings

Under the inventory report and certificate of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Chhabra, Baran dated 6 June 2025, only two samples, F and G, were taken, both from bag 'C'; none was taken from bags A, B, D and E (para 10). In those circumstances, the material in bag 'C' alone 'can only be treated to be alleged contraband', and at 19.80 kg it is less than commercial quantity (para 10). The Court applied its order of 20 April 2026 in Hariram v. State of Rajasthan, where samples drawn from two of six bags limited the alleged contraband to those two bags. There, without samples or an FSL report, the material in the other bags could not be held to be contraband, and nothing showed that the samples had been taken after mixing the whole (para 11). Hariram in turn relied on the Supreme Court's bail order in Puranmal Jat, which held that the Section 37 restriction does not apply below the 50 kg commercial quantity for poppy straw (para 11). Noting more than a year in custody, the Court granted bail without expressing any opinion on the merits (paras 12-13).

Legal Principle

At the bail stage, where samples are drawn from only some of the bags seized, the quantity that counts as alleged contraband is the quantity in the sampled bags. If that falls below commercial quantity, the restriction in Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not stand in the way of bail (paras 10-11).

NyayVidhan's view · Practice note

Why It Matters

The order turns on the Magistrate's inventory certificate: two samples, both from bag 'C', none from the other four bags (para 10). Despite the State's plea that the other bags held similar material, the Court treated only the sampled bag as the alleged contraband, following its order in Hariram v. State of Rajasthan (paras 8, 10-11). It is a bail order: no opinion on the merits is expressed (para 13) and Section 52A is not discussed. For investigators, the lesson is to sample every packet, or record that the contents were mixed first (para 11). Compare Mangilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, where the Supreme Court held a Magistrate-certified inventory and sample list to be primary evidence.

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

Precedents Relied Upon

  1. Hariram v. State of Rajasthan S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 741/2026, order dated 20.04.2026 (Rajasthan High Court)
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ paras 7, 11

    Where samples were drawn from only some of the bags seized, only the material in the sampled bags can be treated as contraband; if that is below commercial quantity, bail may be granted.

Join our WhatsApp Group
✕

Try: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt