NDPS Act | Law does not distinguish between Indian and American Ganja: Delhi High Court while granting Bail

Recently, the Delhi High Court granted bail to an accused in a case registered under the NDPS Act, holding that mere “possibility” of involvement cannot establish conspiracy. The Court noted that possession of a small quantity of contraband is a bailable offence and observed that “the prosecution has to bring cogent evidence to connect an accused with conspiracy, mere suspicion cannot suffice".

The case arose when parcels suspected to contain ganja were intercepted at the Foreign Post Office. Upon opening, they were found to contain over five kilograms of ganja. The parcels had fake recipient addresses but carried phone numbers that were later linked, through IMEI details, to the accused. Apart from this, a recovery of about eight hundred grams of ganja was also made from him.

The counsel for the accused argued that his client had been falsely implicated, stressing that the only recovery made from him was of a small quantity, which is bailable under the NDPS Act. It was also submitted that the SIM card connected to the intercepted parcels was issued to another person and that the accused had started using the relevant phone much after the parcels were seized. The counsel highlighted that even the prosecution admitted it was only a “possibility” that the accused might have gone to collect the parcels.

On the other hand, the prosecution contended that the case concerned an international drug syndicate and described the accused as its mastermind. It was argued that the accused’s mobile phone location coincided with the area where the contraband parcels were to be delivered, and the ganja recovered from him visually matched the ganja found in the parcels. The prosecution also stressed that the contraband was “American ganja,” which was more expensive than Indian ganja, thereby showing higher culpability.

The Court, however, rejected these submissions. It observed, “The only incriminating evidence against the accused is the recovery of 871 grams ganja, which is a small quantity and possession whereof is a bailable offence. As regards the parcels, even according to prosecution, there was only a ‘possibility’ that the accused would collect them".

The Court further noted that visual observation of the investigating officer could not be the basis for connecting the contraband recovered from the accused with that found in the parcels, particularly in the absence of a forensic report. It categorically stated, “The NDPS Act does not make any distinction between Indian ganja and American ganja. Merely because the latter is more expensive, culpability does not increase".

It also held that mobile phone tower location evidence was insufficient to prove conspiracy since such data could cover hundreds of persons in the same area.

Concluding that there was no cogent material to justify continued incarceration, the Court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the accused on furnishing a personal bond of ₹10,000 with one surety.

Case Title: Abdul Malik Alias Parvez vs. State Govt of Nct of Delhi

Case No.: Bail Appln. 2465/2025

Coram: Justice Girish Kathpalia

Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Akshay Bhandari, Anmol Sachdeva

Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Aman Usman (APP for State)