In a packed courtroom on Friday, the Supreme Court sounded what felt like a sharp wake-up call on India’s growing drug problem. During the hearing of a bail matter from Andhra Pradesh, the bench remarked that the country is facing a “deepening and dangerous” drug crisis, especially among the youth. The tone in the courtroom shifted when the judges began citing global reports and Indian research, almost as if trying to underline the severity of the issue to everyone present.
Background
The case before the Court involved an accused from whom over 731 kilograms of ganja-worth nearly ₹2.9 crore-was allegedly recovered. The Andhra Pradesh High Court had granted him bail earlier this year, relying on factors like the completion of investigation, slow trial, and an assurance from the accused’s brother, who serves as a sepoy in the Indian Army.
However, the Union of India, represented by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), challenged that decision. Officials argued that the High Court had overlooked Section 37 of the NDPS Act, a provision that makes bail extremely difficult in cases involving commercial quantities. In simple terms, Section 37 requires courts to be satisfied that the accused is not prima facie guilty and that he will not commit another offence while on bail.
The government argued that these mandatory conditions were never addressed by the High Court.
Court’s Observations
The bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice N.V. Anjaria took a wide-angle view of the issue before turning to the facts of the case. Citing the 2025 UN World Drug Report, the Court noted that more than 316 million people globally now use drugs, and India is “clearly not insulated.”
“The bench observed, ‘Drug trafficking and addiction have become pervasive. In India, the increase in youth substance abuse is extremely concerning, affecting families, communities, and even the country’s cultural and social foundations.’”
The judges also referred to research from the Indian Journal of Community Medicine, published in April 2025, which highlights how young Indians are increasingly falling into patterns of substance dependence.
At one point, Justice Manmohan remarked almost conversationally, “According to several news reports, India now faces a stark choice-either confront this crisis systematically or lose a generation of young people.”
Turning to the case itself, the Court noted that the scale of recovery suggested organised trafficking. The contraband was allegedly hidden in fabricated cavities beneath a trailer-the kind of effort that, according to the bench, “does not happen by accident.”
Regarding the one-year-four-month custody period, the judges said such a duration cannot be considered excessive when the NDPS Act prescribes a minimum of ten years’ imprisonment for the offences.
The bench also rejected the argument that the accused’s Army-sepoy brother could assure his presence. “In India, the alleged sins of an accused cannot be visited on his brother or other family members,” the Court said bluntly.
Decision
Concluding that the High Court had “completely overlooked” the strict requirements of Section 37, the Supreme Court set aside the bail order and directed the accused to surrender within two weeks. With that, the courtroom fell silent for a moment-something that often happens when the Court’s message is meant to travel far beyond the four walls of the hall.
Case Title: Union of India (NCB) vs. Accused in 731 kg Ganja Seizure Case
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Manmohan & Justice N.V. Anjaria