NDPS bail refused where call records, antecedents, and trafficking links showed active involvement beyond mere possession.

Regular bail in an NDPS matter was refused where the investigation indicated active involvement in buying and selling contraband, not mere possession. Repeated call-detail contacts with co-accused and other persons linked to the alleged trafficking network, together with prior antecedents, were treated as material against release. The Court also noted that parity protection was unavailable and that the stringent NDPS bail restrictions, the presumption arising from possession, and the need to protect society weighed against granting bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether regular bail should be granted in an NDPS case despite the applicant's alleged non-recovery from personal possession, prior antecedents, call-detail evidence, and the restrictions under the NDPS bail regime.

Analysis: The application was considered in the backdrop of the applicant's alleged role as a participant in the drug trade, the material collected during investigation, and the call-detail record showing repeated communication with co-accused and other persons connected with the alleged trafficking network. The Court found that the case was not one of mere possession simpliciter, but one indicating active involvement in buying and selling contraband, along with a history of similar antecedents. On that basis, the Court held that the protection of parity was unavailable and that the restrictions governing bail in NDPS matters, together with the presumption arising from possession and the need to protect society, weighed against release.

Conclusion: The applicant was not entitled to regular bail and the request was rejected.

---