Negation of Bail is the Rule in NDPS Cases Involving Commercial Quantity: Himachal Pradesh High Court Denies Bail

“Reasonable belief of innocence under Section 37 NDPS Act must rest on material—not presumptions,”  In a detailed and emphatic order reiterating the statutory bar on bail in NDPS cases involving commercial quantity, the Himachal Pradesh High Court on January 23, 2026, refused to grant regular bail to Roshan Lal, who was arrested with 480 grams of Tramadol (a psychotropic substance) and 22.92 grams of heroin, both seized from the vehicle he was driving. The Court concluded that the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not satisfied, especially in light of the accused’s prior life sentence in another criminal case, and held that the plea for violation of the right to a speedy trial could not override the statutory prohibition under Section 37.

The ruling came in CrMP(M) No. 2393 of 2025, titled Roshan Lal v. State of Himachal Pradesh, before Justice Rakesh Kainthla, sitting as Vacation Judge.

“Liberal Approach Impermissible in NDPS Bail—Twin Conditions Are Mandatory”

Introduction: 480g Tramadol Seized—Held to be Commercial Quantity, Triggering Rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act

Rejecting the plea for bail under Section 439 CrPC, the Court emphasized that the recovery of 960 capsules of Parivon Spas Plus (each containing 50 mg of Tramadol Hydrochloride) constituted 480 grams of Tramadol, which clearly falls within the category of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. In addition, 22.92 grams of heroin was recovered from the vehicle’s dashboard.

“The petitioner was found prima facie in possession of a commercial quantity of Tramadol capsules. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner would not indulge in the commission of an offence if released on bail,” observed the Court.

The Court further noted that Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates two cumulative conditions before bail can be granted in such cases:

1. The Court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence, and

2. The accused is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

“The expression ‘reasonable grounds’ means something more than prima facie grounds. It contemplates substantial probable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence,” the Court reiterated, relying on multiple Supreme Court precedents including State of Kerala v. Rajesh (AIR 2020 SC 721) and Union of India v. Mohd. Nawaz Khan (2021) 10 SCC 100.

“Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Dilute the Statutory Mandate of Section 37”

Legal Issue: Can Delay in Trial Override the Embargo on Bail Under NDPS Act? Court Says No

One of the key arguments raised by the petitioner was that prolonged incarceration and delay in conclusion of trial violated his fundamental right to speedy trial under Article 21, and that this delay should weigh in favour of granting bail.

However, the Court held that delay alone cannot be the basis to bypass the twin statutory conditions of Section 37, particularly in the absence of any material to demonstrate that the delay was solely attributable to the prosecution.

“The petitioner has not filed the copies of the order sheet to demonstrate that the delay is not attributable to him but to the prosecution… it is impermissible to grant bail on the ground of delay alone when the petitioner has not satisfied the requirement of Section 37,” the Court observed.

In support of its conclusion, the Court cited the recent decision in Union of India v. Vijin K. Varghese, 2025 INSC 1316, where the Supreme Court emphasized that prolonged incarceration does not dilute the rigours of Section 37, unless the twin conditions are independently satisfied.

“Criminal Antecedents and Likelihood of Repetition Militate Against Bail”

The Court also took note of the petitioner’s prior conviction in a separate FIR (FIR No. 440/12), where he was sentenced to life imprisonment, a factor which, in the Court’s view, enhanced the risk of repetition of offence and tampering with witnesses.

“The antecedents and nature of allegations indicate possibility of re-offending and witness intimidation—factors which weigh against the grant of bail,” the Court recorded in its findings.

“In NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases, Grant of Bail Is the Exception, Not the Rule”

Referring to the recent authoritative pronouncement in NCB v. Kashif (2024) 11 SCC 372, the High Court re-affirmed the settled principle that “negation of bail is the rule and grant is an exception” in NDPS cases involving commercial quantity.

“While considering the application for bail, the court has to bear in mind the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which are mandatory in nature. The recording of findings as mandated in Section 37 is a sine qua non for granting bail to the accused,” quoted the Court.

“Satisfaction That Accused is Not Guilty Must Be Based on Material, Not Assumptions”

A noteworthy aspect of the Court’s reasoning is its consistent reference to the standard of judicial satisfaction required under Section 37.

“The Court, while considering the application for bail with reference to Section 37 of the Act, is not called upon to record a finding of not guilty… but the Court must be satisfied on the basis of available material that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty,” the Bench clarified.

The Court rejected the submission that bail is the rule and jail the exception, observing that this maxim cannot apply to cases governed by the special statutory embargo under the NDPS Act, especially those involving commercial quantity.

Bail Refused, Observations Limited to Bail Stage

Finding no merit in the petition, the Court held that both conditions under Section 37 were not satisfied, and denied the grant of bail.

“In view of the above, the present petition fails, and the same is dismissed,” concluded the Court, while also clarifying that its observations are confined to the bail proceedings and shall not affect the merits of the trial.

Date of Decision: 23 January 2026