ORDER Petitioners are accused 1, 2 and 4 facing charge for offence punishable under Sections 17(b) and 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and 1. Certified copy received on 2-7-2010 Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for illegal transporting 2 kgs. of Opium in Crime No. 42 of 2010. 2. The petitioners seek bail and State has been notified. 3. The Government Pleader has filed counter to the bail application. The prosecution case is based on the report of Ravindra S. Shirur, Inspector of Police of the jurisdiction who, acting on credible information proceeded to bypass road between Dharwad to Bangalore on 26-3-2010 at 11.00 a.m. Noticing that Indica Car bearing No. KA 35/A-1718 was used by the accused, who are petitioners herein, for transporting Opium in the car, it was intercepted and searched. It was found petitioners possessed Opium without licence. The prosecution alleges that search was conducted in compliance of statutory provision of NDPS Act and the accused having been found to be in the possession Opium, there is a presumption of guilt against them. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would contend that the quantity of Opium seized is 02 kgs., which is more than small quantity but less than commercial quantity. The charge raised is only under Sections 17(b) and 18 of the NDPS Act. Therefore, the punishment which the petitioners may ultimately suffer will not be more than 10 years. He would further submit that restriction of grant of bail under Section 37 of NDPS Act is not applicable to them. 5. However, the learned Government Pleader, Sri Vinayaka Kulkarni has seriously opposed bail contending the petitioners are guilty of illegal possession of the Opium and hence offence is serious. 6. As could be seen from the Section 37 of the NDPS Act restrictions on grant of bail are in respect of accused persons facing charge for offences punishable under Sections 19, 27-A of the NDPS Act or where the quantity of contraband seized is commercial quantity, in the instant case, charge is under Sections 17 and 18 of the NDPS Act and quantity of opium is less than commercial quantity. Therefore, I am satisfied that petition could be considered on its merit. 7. It is seen that co-accused who was the driver of the vehicle had applied to this Court in Cr. P. No. 2276 of 2007 and he has been granted bail. Therefore, I am satisfied that petition could be considered on its merit. 7. It is seen that co-accused who was the driver of the vehicle had applied to this Court in Cr. P. No. 2276 of 2007 and he has been granted bail. As far as petitioners are concerned the Sessions Court rejected the request, considering the said fact and there was one occupant in the car and as one of other has granted bail, petitioners could also be entitled to the same relief. 8. Hence the order. Petition is allowed, subject to following conditions: 1. The petitioners shall execute bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or the Court of Sessions, as the case may be. 2. They shall not tamper the prosecution material or prevail upon witnesses by any means. 3. They shall not indulge in any act of violence against the complainant and/or the witnesses.