#contraband possession

The Rajasthan High Court granted bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, holding that disclosure statements alone, without physical recovery of contraband or corroborative evidence, cannot satisfy the twin conditions for denial of bail. The Paytm transaction, unlinked to drug proceeds and unsupported by CDR or bank records, was deemed insufficient to establish active involvement, reinforcing that circumstantial evidence must rise above speculation in drug cases.

The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail to an accused in a food safety case where the alleged contraband was recovered from a co-accused’s premises, not his own, and the legal validity of BNS Section 123 remains under Supreme Court review. This ruling reinforces that mere association through disclosure, without physical possession or direct evidence, cannot justify pre-arrest detention - especially when the statute’s applicability is unsettled, protecting individuals from speculative prosecution under untested provisions.

The Kerala High Court granted bail to two accused in possession of 40 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor, ruling that detention without investigative necessity for a first-time offender with no intent to sell violates the principle of proportionality. This reinforces that personal consumption, even in large quantities under state liquor laws, cannot justify prolonged pre-trial custody when no public safety or investigation risk exists.

Chhattisgarh High Court reduces a 5-year sentence to time served (1 year 9 months) for possession of 2kg cannabis, emphasizing proportionality where undue procedural delay and sub-commercial quantity mitigate punishment. The ruling underscores judicial discretion in balancing retribution with fairness in NDPS cases.