2013 (11) TMI 496 - HC - Customs

Bail Application - 975 grams of white Coloured Granules seized - Classification of drug - Revenue suspected it to be MATHAQUALONE but later it was found to be KETAMINE HYDRO CHLORIDE - Held that - The contraband seized is of 975 grams valued at ₹ 9,75,000/-. Earlier, KETAMINE HYDRO CHLORIDE was not a scheduled drug. However, as per G.S.R.311(E) dated 10th February, 2011 KETAMINE is a scheduled Psychotropic substance and 500 gm and above are commercial quantity. Only on that reason, the earlier bail applications were dismissed and there is no change of circumstances warranting to take a different view - Decided against Appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Bail application under Secs.8(c), r/w 21, 23 and 28 of NDPS Act and u/s 135 of Customs Act of 1962.
- Seizure of KETAMINE HYDRO CHLORIDE.
- Classification of KETAMINE HYDRO CHLORIDE as a scheduled drug.
- Dismissal of bail applications based on the quantity and classification of the substance.
- Comparison with similar cases in other High Courts.

Analysis:
The petitioners, arrested for possessing KETAMINE HYDRO CHLORIDE, sought bail, arguing that the substance was not a scheduled drug and the quantity was minimal, with a low value. The prosecution contended that KETAMINE HYDRO CHLORIDE is a scheduled substance under the NDPS Act, justifying the dismissal of earlier bail applications due to its commercial quantity and classification. The petitioners highlighted discrepancies in the initial description of the seized substance and cited cases from other High Courts where bail was granted in similar situations.

The court noted the contraband's weight and value, emphasizing that KETAMINE HYDRO CHLORIDE had been classified as a scheduled Psychotropic substance, with 500 gm and above considered commercial quantity. Referring to a specific amendment, the court upheld the earlier dismissals of bail applications based on the substance's classification and quantity, finding no new circumstances to warrant a different decision. Consequently, the current bail applications were rejected.

This judgment underscores the significance of the classification of substances under the NDPS Act, particularly in determining bail eligibility based on quantity and scheduled status. The court's reliance on legislative amendments and precedents from other High Courts highlights the consistency required in drug-related cases, ensuring uniform application of laws across jurisdictions.