ORDER : 1. The petitioners are accused of commission of the offences punishable under Section 20(a) and 20(b) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered in Crime No. 145/2016 of Hanur police station. 2. Heard Sri. Shiva Prasad Y.S. learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. B. Vishweshwaraiah, learned HCGP for the respondent-State and perused the records. 3. The case of the prosecution is that in the afternoon of 16.12.2016, on credible information, the police reached the backyard of the accused and seized 10 K.Gs of ‘Ganja leaves’. Petitioners were arrested and they have remained in custody since then. 4. Arguing in support of this petition, Sri. Shiva Prasad Y.S. the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against these petitioners is that the Ganja leaves were found in their possession. ‘Ganja leaves’ cannot treated as Psychotropic Substances as defined under Section 2(iii)(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. He placed reliance on an order passed by this Court dated 18.02.2016 in Crl. P. No. 882/2016 to contend that in similar circumstances, this Court has enlarged the accused therein on bail and hence, prays for allowing of the petition on the ground of parity. 5. Per contra, Sri. B. Vishweshwaraiah, learned HCGP opposes the bail petition. 6. On careful reading of the complaint, it is seen that what was seized from the possession of the accused is ‘Ganja leaves’. Section 2(iii)(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 reads as follows: “2. Definitions.– In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires: (i) xxxxxxx (ii) xxxxxxx (iii) “cannabis (hemp)’ means:– (a) xxxxxxxx (b) Ganja, that 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.” 7. Unless the material seized falls within the above definition, the same cannot be defined as Narcotic Drugs or Psychotropic Substances. In the instant case, the seized item does not fall within above definition. Further, this court in similar circumstances, in the case referred to above has enlarged the accused therein on bail. 8. In the circumstances, in my view, this petition merits consideration and deserves to be allowed. In the instant case, the seized item does not fall within above definition. Further, this court in similar circumstances, in the case referred to above has enlarged the accused therein on bail. 8. In the circumstances, in my view, this petition merits consideration and deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that: (i) Petitioner shall be released on bail upon his executing a self bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; (ii) Petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the further course of investigation and appear before him as and when called upon; (iii) Petitioner shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional Police on every 1st and 3rd Sunday between 10 a.m. & 1 p.m. till the charge sheet is filed; (iv) Petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to prosecution witness or any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or investigating officer; (v) Petitioner shall not involve himself in any criminal activities; (vi) If the petitioner violates any one of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. Petition allowed.