The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) held that where the quantity of the alleged contraband is below the notified commercial quantity, the provisions of Rule 10 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022 do not operate with the same degree of strictness, particularly when the accused/applicant has no previous criminal history under the NDPS Act and has remained in judicial custody for a considerable period.
The said order has been passed by the Single Bench of Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar while allowing the bail application of Mohammad Imran, who was prosecuted for carrying the prohibited narcotic substance during travel.
According to the case of the prosecution, the accused/applicant was travelling from Bangkok to Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport by Air India Express Flight.
At the Airport, he was intercepted and concerned authorities make search for carrying the prohibited narcotics substance.
During search, 5.998 kilograms of ganja/marijuana was recovered from his possession and the said contraband was kept in 12 separate packets.
The authorities found the applicant guilty under the relevant provions of NDPS Act. Further, in relation to the incidence, the FIR was lodged under section 8, 20, 23 of NDPS Act, 1985 at Police Station, Air Customs, Lucknow.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that alleged recovery was below the commercial quantity as provided under the NDPS Act and the provisions would not apply to the instant facts of the case.
It was further stated that the authorities didn’t comply with the Rule 10 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Seizure, Storage, Sampling and Disposal) Rules, 2022.
As there is non-compliance of the aforesaid Rules with procedural irregularity, only two samples from the single packet had been drawn, which creates doubts on the prosecution.
On the other hand, counsel for the Customs Department argued that admittedly recovered quantity was more than the small quantity but due procedure has been followed in accordance with law.
After hearing both the parties, the Court found the applicant to be enlarged on bail.
Case: Mohammad Imran vs Union Of India Thru. Investigating Officer Shri Ankit Kumar Lko.
Date of Order: 25.02.2026
See the Order: Mohammad Imran vs Union Of India Thru. Investigating Officer Shri Ankit Kumar Lko.
