Sanchayita Lahkar

The High Court of Delhi Single Bench of Justice Shalinder Kaur dismissed a petition seeking regular bail filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petition arose in connection with FIR No. 0377/2024 dated 7 July 2024, registered at Police Station Palam Village, concerning alleged offences under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).

The petitioner, who had been in custody for approximately 10 months, sought release on the grounds that the contraband allegedly recovered from him was of an intermediate quantity and thus the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act did not apply. However, the Court dismissed the bail application, observing that the record prima facie indicated a conspiracy involving a commercial quantity, which invokes the statutory bar on granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Also Read: Gang Rape | Supreme Court Upholds Conviction as Penetrative Act by One Fixes Guilt on All If Common Intention Exists | Life Sentence Reduced to 10 Years

On 7 July 2024, during routine crime prevention and detection duty in South-West Delhi, a seven-member team from the Special Staff apprehended five individuals—including the petitioner—near the CGHS Dispensary, Palam Flyover, Palam, Delhi. According to the prosecution, each individual was found in possession of Ganja concealed in backpacks. Following preliminary inquiries, their identities were confirmed.

In compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, all accused were informed of their right to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, but all declined. The Ganja recovered was weighed and found to total 27.7 kilograms.

Initially, the FIR invoked only Section 20 of the NDPS Act. All five accused were arrested, and subsequent interrogation led to claims that the transportation of Ganja was done at the behest of Deepak, who himself claimed to be acting under instructions from an individual named Arin. Based on this, Section 29 was later added to the FIR.

The investigation progressed with the filing of a charge-sheet on 3 September 2024, and a supplementary charge-sheet on 25 October 2024 including the FSL report. The petitioner’s bail application before the Special Judge, NDPS, Dwarka Courts was dismissed on 21 December 2024, leading to the present application.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the quantity of 3.944 kg recovered from him constitutes only an intermediate quantity, thus excluding the applicability of Section 37. He also argued that the Special Judge had erroneously clubbed the individual recoveries to simulate a commercial quantity. It was contended that there was no credible material to substantiate the charge of conspiracy, and the statements of co-accused in custody could not suffice to invoke Section 29.

Reliance was placed on Challimuddin v. State of NCT of Delhi, BAIL APPLN. 3017/2024, where the Court had declined to apply Section 29 in absence of corroborative evidence of conspiracy.

In opposition, the State submitted that the accused acted in conspiracy, supported by mobile location data showing all five accused were present at Station Road, Cooch Behar, on 5 July 2024, traveling together to Delhi, and being traced to Mahipalpur on 7 July 2024—the day and place of recovery. The State relied on Awadesh Yadav v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ridhm Rana v. State (NCT of Delhi) to argue that the collective recovery supported the invocation of Section 37.

Justice Shalinder Kaur recorded that "the quantity of Ganja stated to have been recovered from the petitioner is 3.944 Kgs, which is undisputedly below the threshold of commercial quantity, which, for Ganja, stands at 20 kg as per the NDPS Act." The Court noted that ordinarily, the bar under Section 37(1)(b) would not apply.

However, the Court stated: "where Section 29 of the NDPS Act is invoked, and the allegation pertains to a conspiracy to commit an offence involving a commercial quantity, the statutory rigor under Section 37 of the NDPS Act becomes applicable."

On the petitioner’s contention regarding lack of evidence, the Court observed that "mere acquaintance or association among co-accused, unsupported by credible evidence of a common intention, cannot justify the invocation of Section 29."

Nonetheless, the Court found that mobile location data of all accused being present at the same origin point on 5 July 2024 and travelling together to the place of recovery provided material suggesting joint involvement. The Court recorded: "This synchronized movement of multiple individuals, from a common point of origin to a common destination, followed by the recovery of similar contraband from each, speaks to a concerted act rather than an isolated or independent instance of possession."

Also Read: Sanctity Of Parasnath Hill Must Be Upheld | Jharkhand High Court Bans Tourism Activities, Mining, And Non-Vegetarian Food | Orders Strict Compliance To Protect Sacredness

The Court further distinguished the case from Challimuddin, stating that "in that case, there was no substantial material on record to show the conspiracy amongst the accused."

Justice Shalinder Kaur concluded that: "the material on record, at this stage, furnishes sufficient basis to sustain a prima facie inference of conspiracy involving commercial quantity, thereby attracting the rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act."

Accordingly, the bail application was dismissed.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioner: Mr. Shreesh Chadha, Mr. Divjot S. Bhatia, Mr. Aman S. Bakshi, Mr. Shaurya Agarwal

For the State: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP

Case Title: Pradip Barman v. State of NCT of Delhi

Neutral Citation: 2025: DHC:3271

Case Number: BAIL APPLN. 138/2025

Bench: Justice Shalinder Kaur

[Read/Download order]