JUDGMENT : 1. On 17.02.2018, a police patrol party stopped a vehicle, make-Taveera bearing Registration No. JK03C-6054, which was being driven towards Seeloo Sopore. Besides the driver, one passenger, named Gh. Qadir Malik S/o Gh Nabi Malik R/o Tahab Pulwama, was also traveling in the said vehicle. The driver disclosed his name as Gowhar Ahmad Mir S/o Gh. Nabi Mir R/o Kheelan Pulwama. During their search, charas weighing 1140 grams was recovered from their possession and to put it appropriately 270 grams were recovered from Gowhar Ahmad Mir and 870 grams were recovered from the possession of Gh Qadir Malik. During the preliminary investigation of the case, it came to the fore that both the accused had obtained the charas through illegal means for sale on higher prices to the customers and, therefore, offences under Section 8/20 NDPS Act, were found to have been committed by them and, accordingly, a case bearing FIR No. 33/2018 was registered against them for the commission of the aforesaid offences at police station Sopore, with which the investigation ensued. The samples of the seized contraband were taken. These were sent to J&K Forensic Science Laboratory, Srinagar, for examination and analysis. The statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts of the case were recorded and the site plan was also prepared. The accused were arrested on 17.02.2018. On the completion of the investigation of the case, a charge sheet in terms of Section 173 Cr. PC was laid against the accused before the competent Court of law. 2. The pith and core of the application of the applicant is that it is only an intermediatory quantity of charas that has been recovered from him and, therefore, the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, will not apply to the case on hand. It is also stated by the applicant that he is innocent and has not committed any offence. The contention of the applicant further is that in a case like the present one grant of bail is the rule and its refusal is an exception. It is also pleaded by the applicant that he has deep roots in the society and he will not flee from justice but will cooperate with the investigating officer and will present himself before him if and when he is required to do so. 3. It is also pleaded by the applicant that he has deep roots in the society and he will not flee from justice but will cooperate with the investigating officer and will present himself before him if and when he is required to do so. 3. The respondents have resisted and controverted the application of the applicant chiefly on the grounds, inter alia, that charas was recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant has committed a heinous offence. The menace of the narcotics has eaten into the vitals of the society. It is a crime against the society and the societal concerns have to be guarded with zeal and zest. The motion so preferred by the applicant seeking admission to bail in relation to the above referred crime is devoid of any merit and, as such, the same deserves to be rejected, as the quantity of charas recovered from him falls within the scales of commercial quantity. 4. Heard and considered. 5. The ratio of the judgment dated 18.04.2018 passed by this Court in Bail Application No. 37 of 2018 in case titled Barkat Ullah Mir v State of J&K through P/s Yaripora, Kulgam and the judgment dated 10.05.2018 passed by this Court in Bail Application No. 54 of 2018 in case captioned Tariq Ahmad Lone v. State of J&K through SHO P/S Yaripora, relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant in carving out a case for the applicant does not apply to the facts and the circumstance of the instant case, as the quantity of poppy straw recovered in both them was an intermediary one. Therefore, this application cannot be tested on the parameters of the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant inasmuch as the applicant herein this application acted in concert with the other one and the quantity of charas recovered from both of them is 1140 grams, which falls with the area and scales of commercial quantity. 6. Therefore, this application cannot be tested on the parameters of the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant inasmuch as the applicant herein this application acted in concert with the other one and the quantity of charas recovered from both of them is 1140 grams, which falls with the area and scales of commercial quantity. 6. In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses vii(a) and xxiii(a) of Section 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) and in super session of Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue Notification S.O. 527 (E) dated 16th July, 1996, except in respect of things done or omitted to be done before such super session, the Central Government specified the quantity mentioned in columns 5 and 6 of the Table, in relation to the narcotic drug or psychotropic substance mentioned in the corresponding entry in columns 2 to 4 of the said Table, as the small quantity and commercial quantity respectively for the purpose of the said clauses of that section. Column 5 provides that a quantity upto 100 gms of charas falls within the parameters of small quantity and a quantity of 1 Kg falls within the scales of commercial quantity. The charas recovered from the possession of the applicant and the co-accused falls within the limits, bounds and the scales of a commercial quantity to which the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, applies in all the fours. If a case falls within the scope and definition of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, grant of bail has to be considered on the agility of the said provision in addition to other limitations prescribed under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which reads as follows: "[37. If a case falls within the scope and definition of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, grant of bail has to be considered on the agility of the said provision in addition to other limitations prescribed under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which reads as follows: "[37. Offences to be cognizable and non-bail able;- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(2 of 1974)- (a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable; (b) no person accused of an offence punishable for [offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for offences involving commercial quantity] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless- (i) the public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. (2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub- section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force, on granting of bail,]." 7. From the perusal of Section 37 quoted above, it is evident that no person can be enlarged on bail, if he is found to be in the possession of a commercial quantity of Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act or offences under Section 19 or Section 24 or Section 27A Act unless the Court comes to the conclusion that the accused is not guilty of such an offence. These restrictions are provided in addition to the checks and curbs imposed under the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law governing the grant of bails. In the present case, as is reiterated here, the applicant and his associate with whom he acted in concert have been found to be in the possession of 1140 grams of charas. These restrictions are provided in addition to the checks and curbs imposed under the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law governing the grant of bails. In the present case, as is reiterated here, the applicant and his associate with whom he acted in concert have been found to be in the possession of 1140 grams of charas. On the basis of the recovery of such a huge quantity of charas found in the possession of the applicant, it can well be said that the applicant is prima facie involved in the commission for the offences aforesaid and there is no reasonable ground to believe that he is not guilty of such offences. The natural or unpresentable human propensity to always eat the forbidden fruits will ever find means and ways to frustrate the laws and rules prohibiting the use of all such stuff. 8. In view of the preceding analysis, the application of the applicant is rejected. He shall be at liberty to move an application for the grant of bail in his favour before the trial Court which shall be decided on its merits. 9. The bail application of the applicant is, accordingly, disposed of, along with connected MPs.