Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sonu Prajapati vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 October, 2025
Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52270
1 MCRC-45000-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 15th OF OCTOBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 45000 of 2025
SONU PRAJAPATI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Prahlad Choudhary, learned Senior Advocate along with
Shri Vipin Kumar Badharia, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri K.S. Patel, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
ORDER
This is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2. The applicant is in jail since 29.06.2025 in connection with Crime
No.764/2025 registered at P.S. - GRP Katni, District- Katni for the offence
punishable under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act. Applicant's first bail
application was dismissed as withdrawn on 08/09/2025.
3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that applicant was found in possession
of 4.145 kgs and co-accused-Ayush Patel was found in possession of 5.300
kg ganja.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is in jail
since 29.06.2025. It is further submitted that in Dehati Nalsi, date of
receiving of information is mentioned as 22/04/2025, whereas the incident is
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52270
2 MCRC-45000-2025
said to have occurred on 29/06/2025 and the FIR has been lodged on
29/06/2025. It is also submitted that as per seizure memo, 4.145 kgs ganja
has been recovered from present applicant and 5.300 kgs has been recovered
from co-accused-Ayush Patel and it contains moisture and if it becomes dry,
then weight of ganja will be reduced substantially. After referring the FSL
report, it is urged that the aforesaid weight of ganja includes the flowering
and fruiting tops of the cannabis plant including seeds and leaves, whereas as
per the definition of 'Ganja' mentioned in Section 2(iii)(b) of NDPS Act,
"ganja, that is, 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". In view of the aforesaid definition of
ganja, the seeds and leaves have to be excluded and only flowering or
fruiting tops have to be weighed. It is also urged that the seized ganja
contains 60% water, and after drying, the weight of ganja would be reduced
to 25% to 40%, resulting in a final weight of approximately 1 kg, which is a
small quantity.
5. In support of aforesaid contentions, learned senior counsel for the
applicant has referred the case of Ibrahim Khwaja Miya Sayyed @ Raju Vs.
State of Maharashtra (Bail Application No.1296/2022 decided on
17.03.2023) and Killo Subbarao and another Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
(passed in Criminal Petition No.5306/2025 decided on 23.06.2025). Further
referring to Para 4,5,7 & 9 of Dayaram Singh and another Vs. State of M.P.
(M.Cr.C. No.7965/2011) , it is urged that until and unless, the percentage of
tetrahydrocannabinol is mentioned, it cannot be said that the alleged
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52270
3 MCRC-45000-2025
contraband is ganja. Further, after referring the aforesaid judgment of
Dayaram Singh (supra) , it is urged that percentage of tetrahydrocannabinol
should be 25% in case of ganja. As in FSL report, the percentage of
tetrahydrocannabinol is not mentioned, therefore, it cannot be said that
articles seized in this case from the applicant and co-accused is ganja.
6. Learned senior counsel for the applicant also submits that the
applicant and co-accused are LLB students and they are not resident of
Katni. Both belongs to Uttar Pradesh. It also submitted that on 27/06/2025
both were returning from Heerakund Express after visiting Jaganathpuri.
They were caught without ticket at Umariya Station while travelling and they
were deboarded at Mudwara on 27/06/2025 itself. Time of arrival of
Heerakund Express at Mudwara station is 12:30 p.m. They both were kept in
custody by GRP and RPF from 27/06/2025 to 29/06/2025. The applicant has
sought CCTV footage of various stations. Further in FIR is dated 29/06/2025
and it has been registered at 13:10, whereas in arrest memo the time
mentioned is 6:55 p.m. In FIR, all the procedure and proceedings have been
mentioned whereas at the time of lodging of FIR, no proceeding was
complete. There are no criminal antecedents of the present applicant. On
above grounds, it is urged that applicant be released on bail.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has
opposed the application.
7. This court has examined the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties in the light of evidence available on record as well as in the light of
pronouncements referred and relied upon by the applicant.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52270
4 MCRC-45000-2025
8. It is evident that earlier bail application of the applicant was
dismissed as withdrawn on 08/09/2025 and present application has been filed
on 26/09/2025. It is correct that in dehati nalsi, date and time of information
is mentioned as 22/04/2025, and 7:05 but in view of contents of dehati
nalsi/FIR, aforesaid appears to be a typographical error. It is correct that in
FIR, date and time of receiving information is mentioned as 29/06/2025 and
13:10, whereas in arrest memo, time of arrest of present applicant is 7:05 and
time of arrest of co-accused-Ayush is 6:55. Evidently, 6:55 is am and 13:10
is 1:10 pm. In NDPS Act, it is not mentioned that until and unless a
particular percentage of tetrahydrocannabinol is present, it cannot be said that
the contraband is ganja.
9. So far as the definition of ganja is concerned. Section 2(iii)(b) of
NDPS Act defines 'Ganja' as under:
"ganja, that is, 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".
10. Thus, from aforesaid definition of ganja, it is evident that if seeds
and leaves are not accompanied by the tops, then, the leaves and seeds would
not come within the purview of 'Ganja' but if seeds and leaves are
accompanied with the tops, then, seeds and leaves would come within the
purview of 'Ganja'.
11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Mishra Vs.
State of Goa reported in (2009) 3 SCC 797 has held that:
15. As far as exclusion of the moisture content of the seized ganja
is concerned, there is nothing int he NDPS Act to suggest that
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:52270
5 MCRC-45000-2025
when the weight of a quantity of ganja is to be ascertained, the
moisture content has to be separately ascertained and excluded.
On the other hand, we are of the view that the weight of the
contraband would be the weight taken at the time of seizure.
12. In view of aforesaid as well as having regard to nature of evidence
available on record with respect to recovery of ganja from present applicant,
no case for grant of bail is made out.
13. Consequently, this M.Cr.C. is dismissed.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
RS
