NDPS sampling procedure and representative sampling standards shaped the grant of bail after prima facie procedural non-compliance.

Bail in an NDPS matter was considered against the background of a prima facie defective sampling process for seized contraband. The Court noted that, on the FIR version, contents of recovered packets were mixed together in a katta and the sample was drawn from that composite mass, rather than from representative packets. Referring to the applicable standing orders and section 52A of the NDPS Act, the Court observed that sampling must preserve representative value and that indiscriminate mixing may undermine evidentiary reliability. On the material placed, the procedure appeared not to conform to the prescribed requirements, and bail was granted on the stated terms.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 where the sampling procedure for the seized contraband was prima facie not followed in accordance with the applicable standing orders.

Analysis: The application was considered in the backdrop of the FIR allegations and the stated seizure procedure. The Court noted that, on the FIR version itself, the contents of the recovered polythene packets were allegedly mixed together in a katta and the sample was then drawn from that composite mass. It further noted the governing sampling requirements under the relevant standing orders and the procedure contemplated under section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, as well as the principle that samples must be representative of the seized packets and that indiscriminate mixing of contents may undermine the evidentiary value of the sample. On the materials placed, the sampling process appeared, prima facie, not to be in consonance with the prescribed procedure.

Conclusion: Bail was granted to the applicant on the stated terms and conditions.

---