Delhi High Court: In a bail application filed by a foreign national accused of carrying commercial quantity of contraband, the Single Judge Bench of Arun Monga, J, held that since the contents of individual packets had been mixed before being sent for testing, it was difficult to say whether the quantity of contraband seized qualified as ‘commercial quantity’. Thus, the Court granted bail to the accused.
Background
The accused is a foreign national incarcerated in India since 2021 for offences punishable under Sections 8, 21, 23 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The accused was travelling from Doha to Delhi with the co-accused when they had been intercepted by the Customs Officer. During X-ray screening of their bags, some suspicious images were noticed after which they had been taken to the Customs Preventive Room for further verification.
In the presence of two independent witnesses, the Customs Officer searched the check-in bag of the co-accused and found 8 unmarked white cloth packets placed inside transparent poly-bags containing some off-white coloured powders substance weighing 8000 grams.
From the accused’s checked-in bag, the Customs Officer had found 10 transparent plastic packets containing off-white coloured powdery substance weighing 10000 grams. Samples of the recovered off-white coloured powder recovered from each of the accused persons, suspected to be narcotics, were tested with the help of Modified Narcotic Drugs Detection Kit which tested positive as ‘Heroin’.
Analysis, Law and Decision
The Court noted that the testimony of the Investigating Officer made it clear that the contents of all 10 packets recovered from the accused had been mixed up at the time of the trial and therefore it was not possible to discern the packet from which the sample had been sent. Thus, the Court opined that there was doubt on the proof that the tested samples represented a commercial quantity on the whole. Each packet ought to have been individually tested.
The Court further noted that accused had undergone inordinate incarceration for more than 4 years and given the snail’s pace of the proceedings in the trial Court, it may so happen that before the same concludes, the applicant may end up undergoing the entire sentence without being held guilty.
Thus, the Court granted bail to the accused on furnishing of personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The Court further directed the accused to submit an undertaking to the trial Court that he would not leave the jurisdiction of NCR Delhi without the permission of trial Court. He was also directed to furnish details of his residential address in Delhi where he intended to stay upon grant of bail.
[Quentin Decon v. Customs, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 6299, decided on 25-9-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Akshay Bhandari, Anmol Sachdeva, Janak, Kushal Kumar, Megha, Advocates
For the Respondent: Puneett Singhal, SPP
