Actual narcotic content controls ganja quantity assessment; mixed plant material may not trigger the NDPS bail bar.

In an NDPS case involving alleged ganja, the Delhi HC stated that the statutory definition covers only the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, not leaves, stalks or stems when separately considered. Where seized material is a heterogeneous mixture, the quantity for commercial-threshold purposes must be assessed on the basis of the actual narcotic content rather than the whole weighed mass. On the record described, the flowering tops were not separately quantified, creating a prima facie doubt on commercial quantity and, correspondingly, on the applicability of Section 37. The discussion also noted the petitioner's clean antecedents and absence of material suggesting tampering, influence on witnesses, or flight risk, and regular bail was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail in an NDPS case where the seized material allegedly contained flowering tops along with leaves, stalks and stems, and whether the quantity of ganja for the purpose of commercial quantity had to be determined by excluding the non-narcotic portions, thereby affecting the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

Analysis: The definition of ganja under Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 covers only the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, excluding seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops. On that basis, when the seized substance is a heterogeneous mixture containing flowering tops together with leaves, stalks or stems, only the actual narcotic content is relevant for quantifying the seized ganja. The record indicated that the recovered material had been weighed as a whole, including stems and dried leaves, and the actual weight of the flowering or fruiting tops was not separately determined. This created a prima facie discrepancy on whether the quantity crossed the commercial threshold. The petitioner also had clean antecedents and no material was shown to suggest tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, or flight risk.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to regular bail. The Court found that the quantity issue was a matter for trial and that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 were not shown to operate on the facts presented.

Final Conclusion: Regular bail was granted to the petitioner in the NDPS prosecution, subject to the stated conditions, as the Court treated the quantity dispute and the petitioner's antecedents as sufficient to justify release pending trial.

Ratio Decidendi: In a case involving ganja, where the seized material is a heterogeneous mixture and the non-narcotic parts are weighed along with flowering or fruiting tops, the quantity for NDPS purposes must be assessed on the basis of the actual narcotic content; if that actual quantity is not clearly established, the stringent bail bar under Section 37 may not apply.

---