The Supreme Court recently granted bail to a man accused of supplying Ganja seeds on the ground that the definition of "ganja" under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 does not include ganja seeds.A Division Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Manoj Misra observed that“The materials on record show that the petitioner has supplied Ganja seed for cultivation and...
The Supreme Court recently granted bail to a man accused of supplying Ganja seeds on the ground that the definition of "ganja" under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 does not include ganja seeds.
A Division Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Manoj Misra observed that
“The materials on record show that the petitioner has supplied Ganja seed for cultivation and as per the definition of Ganja in Section 2(iii)(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), it is not a banned contraband. There are no specific allegation that the Ganja seeds were supplied by the petitioner to the other person with an intention to receive back the grown Ganja after cultivation.”
The definition of "ganja" as per the NDPS Act is as follows :
"ganja is, the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops), by whatever name they may be known or designated"
The Petitioner had approached the Apex Court challenging the order of the Gujarat High Court rejecting his bail application.
The court observed that material on record showed that the accused had supplied ganja seeds for cultivation, but there was no specific allegation that the ganja seeds were supplied with the intention to receive grown ganja in return.
Adv. Somesh Chandra Jha appearing for the petitioners contended that the matter pertained to ganja seeds which would not come under the purview of the NDPS Act. The Counsel for the petitioner argued that under Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, the definition of ‘cannabis’ does not include ganja seeds.
The court took note of the submission of the counsel for the petitioner and the fact that the accused had been in jail since 20th May 2022 and also that the chargesheet had already been filed, to grant bail to the petitioner.