NDPS bail denied despite non-commercial quantity, as seriousness of contraband, absconding risk, and FSL evidence prevailed.

Bail under the NDPS Act was refused despite the recovered quantity being below commercial quantity because the Court treated the alleged offence as grave in view of the contraband and the accused's asserted role. The risk of absconding, along with the fact that trial evidence had not yet been recorded, weighed against release. The objection to the FSL report was rejected because it reflected the presence of diacetylmorphine. The precedent cited by the defence was held distinguishable on its facts, and the bail application was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 where the recovered quantity was not commercial quantity.

Analysis: The recovered quantity was less than commercial quantity, but the offence was treated as grave having regard to the nature of the contraband and the seriousness of the alleged role. The Court also considered the possibility of absconding if released on bail and noted that the trial evidence was yet to be recorded. The objection based on the FSL report was rejected because the report indicated the presence of diacetylmorphine. The earlier decision relied upon was found distinguishable on its facts.

Conclusion: Bail was declined and the application was dismissed.

---