The Court has clarified that bail can be granted under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act in cases involving seizure below commercial quantity when the accused have no prior criminal history and relevant personal circumstances favour release; this reiteration of established law is binding on subordinate courts and persuasive in similar contexts.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRLMB/13021/2025 of SAMPATA DEVI W/O SHRI PAWAN KUMAR AALA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN |
| CNR | RJHC020874352025 |
| Date of Registration | 06-10-2025 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | ALLOWED |
| Judgment Author | Justice Sameer Jain |
| Court | High Court of Rajasthan |
| Precedent Value |
|
| Type of Law |
|
| Questions of Law | Whether the absence of criminal antecedents and the recovery of contraband below commercial quantity entitle accused to bail under the NDPS Act, considering relevant personal circumstances. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court reasoned that grant of bail is justified where:
All subject to satisfaction of the trial court with personal and surety bonds. The Court refrained from delving into the merits but relied upon the overall facts and circumstances as presented. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Accused-applicants were arrested in relation to FIR No. 296/2025, Police Station Kotwali, Jhunjhunu under Sections 229(1), 61(2) BNS and Section 8/18 NDPS Act. Sampata Devi is about 35 years old; Jitendra Kumar is the sole bread earner for his family. Both have been in custody since 06.09.2025. The contraband seized was below commercial quantity and there were no prior criminal cases against them. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Rajasthan |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts handling bail under similar NDPS Act and BNS sections with comparable facts |
| Follows | Principles on bail where contraband is less than commercial quantity and accused lack criminal antecedents |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that bail under NDPS Act is permissible where contraband recovered is less than commercial quantity and the accused have no previous criminal record.
- Personal circumstances, such as being a sole bread earner or age, are valid grounds in bail consideration alongside statutory factors.
- The mere registration of an NDPS case, without aggravating factors like commercial quantity or past record, does not automatically bar bail.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court considered the arguments of both sides before focusing on the material facts of no previous criminal record, quantity of contraband being below commercial threshold, and applicant-specific circumstances (age, sole bread earner status).
- Without commenting on the merits of prosecution or defence, the Court held these cumulative factors sufficient for bail under Section 483 BNSS.
- Stringent bail conditions (personal and surety bonds) were imposed to ensure the accused’s appearance.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- There are no criminal antecedents.
- The quantity of contraband recovered is below commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
- One accused is the sole bread earner; the other is of relatively young age (35 years).
- Both have been in custody since 06.09.2025 and satisfy grounds for bail.
Respondent (State)
- Opposed bail (details of objections not specified beyond presence and opposition).
Factual Background
The accused-applicants were arrested in FIR No. 296/2025 from Police Station Kotwali, District Jhunjhunu for offences under Sections 229(1), 61(2) BNS and Section 8/18 NDPS Act. Sampata Devi is aged about 35 years, and Jitendra Kumar is the sole bread earner for his family. Both have remained in custody since 06.09.2025. There are no previous criminal cases against either applicant. The quantity of contraband seized in the case was below the commercial quantity as defined under the NDPS Act.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act: The key provision under which the offence was registered, relating to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
- Section 483 BNSS: The procedural provision under which bail was sought.
- The Court considered whether the quantity was less than commercial quantity and whether there were aggravating circumstances (like prior record) as required under the NDPS Act for stringent bail denial.
Procedural Innovations
No new procedural requirements, innovations, or guidelines are specified in the judgment.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Judgment affirms established principles for grant of bail under NDPS Act where accused have no criminal antecedents and seizure is less than commercial quantity.