Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Sitaram S/O Nathulal vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jp:3419) on 23 January, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:3419]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15614/2025
Sitaram S/o Nathulal, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Koli Mohalla
Baniyana, P.S. Lawan, District Dausa. At Present In District Jail
Dausa.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Singh Sherawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
23/01/2026
1. The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has
been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in
connection with FIR No.47/2025 registered at Police Station
Lawan, District Dausa for offence punishable under Section 8/20
of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed
charge-sheet in this matter.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He
submits that the cultivation of “any cannabis plant” is prohibited
and made an offence under Section 8 of the NDPS Act whereas
Section 20 of the NDPS Act discusses punishment for
contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis. He
submits that as per the prosecution case, the petitioner was
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:3419] (2 of 8) [CRLMB-15614/2025]
cultivating ganja plants in his field and total 136 plants weighing
76.970 kgs were recovered from his field. He contends that for the
purpose of determining the total weight of the recovered
contraband ganja, the whole plants were taken into consideration,
including the seeds, roots, stems and leaves, along with the soil
whereas only the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plants
should have been taken for weighing of contraband ganja as per
the defining clause under NDPS Act. However, there was no
bifurcation of seeds and leaves from the flowering or fruiting tops
before weighing the recovered contraband. He submits that
possibility cannot be ruled out that if only the flowering and
fruiting tops are weighed, it will fall under the category of below
commercial quantity. It is submitted that there are no criminal
antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable
time in its conclusion. Counsel further submits that the petitioner
is in custody since 24.05.2025 and further custody of the
petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by
the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that 136 ganja
plants weighing 76.970 kgs have been recovered from the field of
the petitioner which falls under the category of commercial
quantity. Thus, looking to the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act,
benefit of bail should not be extended to the petitioner. However,
he fairly concedes that while determining the total weight of the
recovered contraband, whole plants were taken into consideration,
including the seeds, roots, stems and leaves, along with the soil.
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:3419] (3 of 8) [CRLMB-15614/2025]
4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties
and have perused the material available on record. The Co-
ordinate bench of this Court has dealt with the issue related to the
present bail application in the case of Vinod Kumar S/o Laxman
@ Laxmi Narayan versus State of Rajasthan passed on
07.07.2022 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail App. No.9279/2022. The
relevant part of the said order is reproduced as under:-
“i) The case of the prosecution is that the
petitioner was cultivating ganja plants in his
field and the quantity of the recovered plants is
well above the commercial limit specified for
contraband ganja. Section 2 of the NDPS Act
contains the definitions and clause (iii) of the
same defines what “cannabis (hemp)” means,
through three sub-clauses. The sub-clause (b)
of clause (iii) defines ‘ganja’ as “the flowering
or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding
the seeds and leaves when not accompanied
by the tops), by whatever name they may be
known or designated”. Sub-clause (viia) of
Section 2 of the N.D.P.S. Act defines
“commercial quantity” as any quantity greater
than the quantity specified by the Central
Government by notification in the Official
Gazette, in relation to narcotic drugs and
psychotropic substances. The notification in
effect that specifies small and commercial
quantity for narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances is S.O. 1055 (E) dated 19th
October, 2001 published in the Gazette of
India, Extra., Pt. II Sec. 3(ii) dated 19th
October, 2001 and the commercial quantity
specified therein for ganja is 20 kgs.
ii) As averred, for the purpose of determining
the total weight of the recovered contraband
ganja, the whole plants were taken into
consideration, including the seeds, roots,
stems and leaves, along with the soil as well
whereas only the flowering or fruiting tops of
the cannabis plants should have been taken for(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:3419] (4 of 8) [CRLMB-15614/2025]weighing of contraband ganja as per the
defining clause under N.D.P.S. Act. As there
was no bifurcation of seeds and leaves from
the flowering or fruiting tops before weighing
the recovered contraband and the total weight
of the recovered contraband is just 2 kgs and
700 gms above the commercial quantity, it is
safe to infer that the actual weight of
recovered ganja would be less than the
claimed weight and therefore, below the
stipulated commercial quantity.
iii) The cultivation of “any cannabis plant” is
prohibited and made an offence under sub-
clause (b) of Section 8 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
Further, it is imperative to mention Section 20
of the N.D.P.S. Act, which discusses the
punishment for contravention in relation to
cannabis plant and cannabis. Section 20 of the
N.D.P.S. Act reads as follows:-
20. Punishment for contravention in
relation to cannabis plant and
cannabis:-
Whoever, in contravention of any
provision of this Act or any rule or
order made or condition of licence
granted thereunder,–
(a) cultivates any cannabis plant; or
(b) produces, manufactures,
possesses, sells, purchases,
transports, imports interState, exports
inter-State or uses cannabis, shall be
punishable,–
(i) where such contravention relates to
clause (a) with rigorous imprisonment
for a term which may extend to ten
years, and shall also be liable to fine
which may extend to one lakh rupees;
and
(ii) where such contravention relates
to sub clause (b),–
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:3419] (5 of 8) [CRLMB-15614/2025]
(A) and involves small quantity, with
rigorous imprisonment for a term
which may extend to one year, or with
fine which may extend to ten
thousand rupees, or with both;
(B) and involves quantity lesser than
commercial quantity but greater than
small quantity, with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which may
extend to ten years, and with fine
which may extend to one lakh rupees;
(C) and involves commercial quantity,
with rigorous imprisonment for a term
which shall not be less than ten years
but which may extend to twenty years
and shall also be liable to fine which
shall not be less than one lakh rupees
but which may extend to two lakh
rupees:
Provided that the court may, for
reasons to be recorded in the
judgment, impose a fine exceeding
two lakh rupees. Contravention of
provisions of the N.D.P.S. Act by
cultivation of any cannabis plant is
covered in clause (a) of Section 20
and contravention by production,
manufacture, possession, sale,
purchase, transportation, import inter-
state, export inter-state or use of
cannabis is covered under clause (b)
of Section 20. For the contravention
contained in clause (b), punishments
have been particularised as per the
quantities, namely small, intermediate
and commercial quantities in sub-
clause (i) but for the contravention
contained in clause (a), maximum
punishment for a term of ten years
rigorous imprisonment has been
prescribed without any specification of
quantities. Thus, the corresponding
punishment-prescribing provision for
offence under Section 8(b), relating to
cannabis plant, would be Section
20(a)(i).
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:3419] (6 of 8) [CRLMB-15614/2025]
iv) Grant of bail for offences stipulated in the
N.D.P.S. Act is interdicted by the provisions of
Section 37. Section 37 states that any person
who is accused of an offence under Sections
19, 24 or 27A and of an offence involving
commercial quantity cannot be granted bail.
Neither the offence in the present case is
covered by Sections 19, 24 or 27A of the
N.D.P.S. Act and nor does the recovered ganja
fall in the category of commercial quantity.
Therefore, it can safely be inferred from the
above observations that the petitioner need
not face the rigour of Section 37 with regard to
provision of bail in the present case.”
5. The case referred above relates to recovery of Cannabis
plant and same is the case here where certain quantity of
Cannabis plants alleged to have been recovered. As mentioned in
the case referred supra, the punishment for contravention in
relation to Cannabis plant falls under Section 20 Sub-Clause (a)(i)
of the NDPS Act, as per which, the maximum punishment can be
upto ten years and meaning thereby the embargo contained under
Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not apply in such cases. It is
further significant to note that the definition of ‘ganja’ under NDPS
Act takes in its ambit only the flowering or fruiting tops of
cannabis plant and excludes the seeds and leaves when not
accompanied by the tops. Thus, the definition of ‘ganja’ is
restricted and it does not include the seeds and leaves of ganja
plant.
6. Thus, having regard to the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced
by learned counsel for the petitioner especially considering the
manner in which contraband has been weighed, as also the fact
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:3419] (7 of 8) [CRLMB-15614/2025]
that petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents and trial
will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to
the custody period of the petitioner, but without commenting
anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to
allow the bail application.
7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed
that accused-petitioner- Sitaram S/o Nathulal, shall be released
on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) together with two sureties
in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Fifty Thousand
Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the
stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to
which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing
and as and when called upon to do so.
8. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve
in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall
mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned
police station, till trial is concluded.
9. Concerned SHO shall enter attendance of the petitioner in
the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence
in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to
immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this
regard.
10. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the
notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial
Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:3419] (8 of 8) [CRLMB-15614/2025]
11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the
concerned SHO for necessary compliance.
12. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of
the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of
the case in any manner.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
CHARU SONI /56
(Uploaded on 07/02/2026 at 12:36:49 PM)
(Downloaded on 13/02/2026 at 10:18:31 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)