Orissa High Court
Ajim Raja vs State Of Odisha …. Opposite Party on 24 April, 2026
Author: V. Narasingh
Bench: V. Narasingh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
BLAPL No.2264 of 2026
Ajim Raja .... Petitioner
Mr. A.R. Panda, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Opposite Party
Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER
24.04.2026
Order No.
01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
2. The Petitioner is an accused in connection with
2(a)CC Case No.9 of 2026, pending before the Court of
the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge, Balliguda, Kandhamal, arising out of
District Mobile Unit Kandhamal P.R. No.308 of
2025-26 for alleged commission of offences under
Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act.
3. Learned counsel, on instruction, submits that
except the present BLAPL, no other bail application of
the Petitioner relating to the aforementioned P.S. case
is pending in any other Court.
4. Being aggrieved by the rejection of his
application for bail U/s.483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by the learned Special Judge-
Page 1 of 6
cum-Addl. S.J., Balliguda by order dated 26.02.2026 in
the aforementioned case, the present BLAPL has been
filed.
5. The allegation against the Petitioner is of
possession of contraband (ganja) to the tune of 20Kg.
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
Petitioner that on a misconception that possession of
contraband to the tune of 20Kg ganja attracts the bar
under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act, the prayer of
the Petitioner was rejected by the learned Court in
seisin.
Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act reads as
under:-
“37. Offences to be cognizable and non-
bailable.–(1) Notwithstanding anything
contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (2 of 1974),–
(a) xxx xxx
(b) no person accused of an offence punishable
for [offences under Section 19 or Section 24 or
Section 27-A and also for offences involving
commercial quantity] shall be released on bail or
on his own bond unless–
(i) xxx xxx
(ii) where the Public Prosecutor oppose the
application, the court is satisfied that there are
reasonable grounds for believing that he is not
guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to
commit any offence while on bail.
Page 2 of 6
xxx xxx xxx
(Emphasized)
7. To fortify his submission that the contraband
Ganja to the tune of 20kg which is admittedly the
quantity herein, does not qualify as commercial
quantity, he relies on the judgment of this Court in the
case of Anil Kumar Dash vs. State of Orissa, ILR
(2015) 2 Cut 1233 and Sandhya Rani Patra vs.
State of Odisha, (2020) 80 OCR – 286.
8. To appreciate the submission of the learned
counsel for the Petitioner, it is apt to quote the
provisions relating to commercial quantity as defined
under Clause-(viia) of Section 2 of the NDPS Act, 1985
as well as the definition relating to small quantity under
Clause-(xxiiia) of Section 2 thereof, which reads as
under:-
“2.(viia) “commercial quantity”, in relation to
narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances,
means any quantity greater than the quantity
specified by the Central Government by
notification in the Official Gazette.
(emphasized)
2.(xxiiia) “small quantity”, in relation to narcotic
drugs and psychotropic substances, means any
quantity lesser than the quantity specified by
the Central Government by notification in the
Official Gazette.”
(emphasized)
Page 3 of 6
The Central Government notification referred to as
above is extracted hereunder for convenience of ready
reference:-
S.O.1055(E), dated 19-10-2001. -In exercise of
the powers conferred by clauses (viia) and (xxiiia) of
section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) and in
supersession of Ministry of Finance, Department of
Revenue Notification S.O. 527(E) dated 16th July,
1996, except as respects things done or omitted to
be done before such supersession, the Central
Government hereby specifies the quantity mentioned
in columns 5 and 6 of the Table below, in relation to
the narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance
mentioned in the corresponding entry in columns 2
and 4 of the said Table, as the small quantity and
commercial quantity respectively for the purposes of
the said clauses of that section.
TABLE
[See sub-clause (viia) and (xxiiia) of section 2 of the Act]
SI Name of the Other Chemical Name Small Commerci
No. Narcotic Drug non- Quantit al Quantity
and Psychotropic propriety y (in (in
Substance name gm.) gm./kg.)
(International
non-proprietory
name (INN)
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Acetorphine 3-0- 2 50gm.
acetyltetrahydro-
7-alpha-(1-
hydroxy-1-
methylbutyl)-6,
14-endoetheno-
oripavine
xxx xxx xxx
55. Ganja 1000 20 kg.
9. Referring to the same, this Court in the
judgments hereinabove adverted to, held that the
contraband to the tune of 20Kg (ganja) cannot
Page 4 of 6
qualify as commercial quantity. Hence, to be labelled
as commercial quantity it has to be over and above
20Kg ganja.
10. Learned counsel for the State while does not
dispute the stand on account of non-attraction of the
bar contained in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act,
opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that the
Petitioner is a flight risk.
11. Considering the submissions in the light of the
decision referred to hereinabove, this Court is
persuaded to hold that the bar contained in Section
37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act is not attracted in the case
at hand since admittedly the contraband is 20kg
(Ganja).
At the cost of repetition it is reiterated that
only when the quantity is “greater than quantity
specified” in the Central Government notification, the
bar under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act would
come into play.
12. Taking into account the allegation in the case
at hand and that Petitioner was allegedly possessed
contraband to the tune of 20Kg (Ganja), this Court
directs the Petitioner to be released on bail on such
terms to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin.
Page 5 of 6
13. To allay the legitimate apprehension of the
learned Public Prosecutor regarding ensuring the
presence of the Petitioner during investigation since
he does not belong to the State of Odisha, it is
directed that one of the family members of the
Petitioner shall execute the P.R bond in addition to
the sureties in terms of the order of the learned Court
in seisin and his criminal antecedent from the parent
police station shall also be called for.
13-A. If it comes to fore that the Petitioner has any
criminal antecedent, this order shall not be given
effect to.
14. Additionally, it is directed that the Petitioner
shall appear before the jurisdictional police station
once every month on such date and time to be fixed
by the learned Court in seisin till submission of final
form. Certification of such appearance shall be
submitted to the Court in seisin.
15. Accordingly, the BLAPL stands disposed of.
16. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted
as per rules.
(V. Narasingh)
Signature Not Verified Judge
Digitally Signed
Signed by: AYESHA ROUT
Reason: AuthenticationAyesha
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 27-Apr-2026 21:10:55
Page 6 of 6
