The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently adjudicated a bail application in the case of Vishram vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 27835 of 2024), concerning the illegal cultivation of opium poppy by the applicant, Vishram. The FIR, registered under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, led to the applicantโs arrest on March 18, 2023. This was Vishramโs fourth bail application, following previous rejections.
Legal Issues Involved:
The core legal issue in this case was whether the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which imposes stringent conditions on the grant of bail for certain offenses, are applicable to cases involving the cultivation of opium poppy. The applicantโs counsel argued that the provisions of Section 37 should not apply since the law does not specify the quantity of opium poppy in cases of cultivation, distinguishing it from offenses involving possession of narcotics where the quantity is a determining factor.
Court’s Decision:
Presided over by Justice Vishal Dhagat, the court analyzed the legal framework under the NDPS Act, specifically the definition of “opium poppy” as per Section 2(xvii)(a) and the penal provisions under Section 18(c) of the Act. The court noted that while the Act specifies penalties based on the quantity of contraband substances, it does not prescribe quantities for opium poppy cultivation, which is covered under Section 18(c).
In a significant observation, the court held that โCommercial and small quantity is not prescribed for Opium poppy in the NDPS Act. Therefore, Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not be attracted in the case of cultivation of Opium poppy.โ This interpretation provided a crucial distinction that allowed the court to grant bail to the applicant.
Important Observations:
The court underscored that the absence of a prescribed quantity for opium poppy in the NDPS Act’s schedule effectively removes the case from the ambit of Section 37, which would otherwise bar the granting of bail. This interpretation aligns with the decision in the precedent case of Chhogalal vs. State of M.P. cited by the applicant’s counsel, where a similar legal stance was taken.
Also Read
Consequently, the High Court granted bail to Vishram, directing his release upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 along with two solvent sureties. The court also imposed standard conditions, including regular court appearances and prohibitions on influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, in accordance with Section 480(3) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Surksha Sanhita, 2023.
