JUDGMENT B.A. Patil, J. - The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-accused Nos. 2 to 4 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release them on anticipatory bail in Crime No.100/2020 of Chikkamagalur Town Police Station, Chikkamagaluru for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(A), B(c) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' for short) 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Girish.B. Baladare by virtual hearing and learned HCGP Smt. B.G.Namitha Mahesh for respondent- Police. 3. The genesis of the case of prosecution in brief is that the respondent-Police have received credible information of illegal storing and sale of ganja and after they have made raid on 22.05.2020. About 3 to 5 persons who were there in the house ran way and police were able to catch one person, who also tried to escape. On enquiry, he told his name as Jabbar i.e. accused No.1 and there they have found 1394 grams of ganja worth Rs.30,000/- in the present of the witnesses, the same has been seized and a case has been registered. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners-accused that only on the basis of the voluntary statement given by petitioner-accused No.1 the petitioner-accused Nos. 2 to 4 have been inculcated in this case. It is his further submission that the ganja has not been seized from the possession of the present petitionersaccused. 5. It is his further submission that the ganja which has been seized from the possession of the petitioner-accused No.1 is not a commercial quantity. It is his further submission that the only allegation in the charge sheet, in the complaint and other material is that the petitioners-accused is used to supply ganja. On the basis of that, they have been included as accused. The petitioners-accused are ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner-accused No.2 is the main accused and she has been involved in many more cases and the investigation are in progress. 7. It is her further submission that the petitioner-accused No.2 is having the bad antecedents, he has been involved in this case. 6. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner-accused No.2 is the main accused and she has been involved in many more cases and the investigation are in progress. 7. It is her further submission that the petitioner-accused No.2 is having the bad antecedents, he has been involved in this case. It is her further submission that he used to supply ganja and on the basis of the said supply, petitioner-accused No.1 used to deliver the ganja. It is her further submission that the petitioners-accused Nos. 2 to 4 were absconding and were not available for the purpose of investigation or interrogation. On these grounds, she prayed to dismiss the petition. 8. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records. 9. On perusal of the records that it indicates that as against the petitioner-accused No.2 that three cases have been registered and the matter is still under investigation and the antecedents of petitioner-accused No.2 are seen that he appears to be habitual offender and in that light, I am of the considered opinion that there are no good ground to grant anticipatory bail. 10. Insofar as the petitioner-accused Nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, there are no serious allegations, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint it indicates only on the basis of the voluntary statement given by accused No.1 they have been included as accused and no recovery of ganja has been made from their possession. Under such circumstances, that too when the alleged offences are not serious and punishable with death or imprisonment for life, under such circumstances, by imposing stringent conditions, petitioner-accused Nos.3 and 4 may be released on anticipatory bail. In that light, the following: ORDER 1. The petition as against the petitioner-accused No.2 is dismissed . 2. The petition as against petitioner-accused Nos.3 and 4 i.e. Nazia Banu, W/o. Vaseem and Saif S/o Vaseem is hereby allowed and they are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.100/2020 of Chikkamagalur Town Police Station, Chikkamagaluru for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(A), B(c) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with the following conditions: i) Petitioner-accused Nos. 3 and 4 shall execute a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with two sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. ii) They shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from today. iii) They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. iv)They shall mark their attendance once in fifteen days between 10.00 a.m., and 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station, till the charge sheet is filed. iv) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission. v) They shall not indulge in similar type of criminal activities in future. If they are found to be involved in such criminal offences, the respondent-Police is at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.