The Kerala High Court ruled that cultivating cannabis plants, even in pots on a terrace, is an offence under the NDPS Act. Justice C.S. Dias clarified that the law punishes the conscious act of growing cannabis, regardless of whether it’s done in soil or containers.
The Kerala High Court has recently ruled that growing cannabis plants in pots on the terrace of a rented house is an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
The case was decided by Justice C.S. Dias, who made it clear that even if the plants are grown in pots instead of directly in soil, it would still be considered as “cultivation of cannabis” under the law.
Justice Dias explained that the NDPS Act does not make any difference between growing a plant in the ground or in a pot. What matters is the deliberate act of planting and nurturing the cannabis plant, which is prohibited.
The Court said,
“The above literal meanings clearly indicate that the expression ‘cultivate any cannabis plant’ used in Sections 8(b) and 20(a) of the Act encompasses any act of planting, tilling, raising, growing, farming or gardening a cannabis plant with the mens rea, whether such cultivation is carried out in the earth or in a pot. The statute does not distinguish between planting in the earth or growing in pots. The essence of the offence lies in the conscious act of planting and nurturing a cannabis plant in contravention of the provisions of the Act.”
The Court made these strong observations while rejecting a plea by Jatin, who had requested to quash the NDPS case filed against him. He was accused of cultivating cannabis plants on the terrace of a rented building in Thiruvananthapuram.
According to the prosecution, Excise officials received a tip-off that Jatin was growing cannabis on his terrace.
After searching the premises, they found five cannabis plants—two of them were 59 cm tall, while the other three measured between 29 and 46 cm. Along with these plants, they also found 5 grams of ganja seeds and dried branches from Jatin’s bedroom.
Based on this discovery, a case was filed against Jatin before the Additional Sessions Court in Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with Sections 20(a)(i) and 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act.
Jatin challenged these proceedings before the Kerala High Court. He argued that the seized plants did not have flowering or fruiting tops, so they did not qualify as ‘ganja’ or ‘cannabis plant’ as per Sections 2(iii)(b) and (iv) of the NDPS Act.
He also claimed that the word “cultivation” in Section 20(a)(i) referred only to growing plants in the soil or earth, not in pots, and that the materials seized—mainly leaves and seeds—were not enough to prove an offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(A).
The public prosecutor, however, strongly opposed his plea. He said that Jatin was caught red-handed with cannabis plants and ganja in his possession, proving his involvement in a serious offence under the NDPS Act.
After going through the law and previous court judgments, the Kerala High Court clarified that the NDPS Act draws a clear line between “ganja” and “cannabis plant.”
It explained that while the term “ganja” refers specifically to the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, the phrase “cannabis plant” covers any plant of the cannabis genus.
Therefore, the absence of flowering tops does not matter when determining whether an offence under Section 20(a)(i)—which deals with cultivating cannabis plants—has been committed.
The Court said,
“Furthermore, Section 8(b) of the Act explicitly prohibits the cultivation of a cannabis plant, and Section 20 imposes separate punishments for (a) cultivating cannabis and (b) possessing, selling or purchasing cannabis. Therefore, it stands beyond any pale of doubt that the expressions ‘cannabis plant’ and ‘ganja’ denote two distinct entities/species within the framework of the Act.”
The Court also observed that the NDPS Act does not define the term “cultivate.” To clarify its meaning, the judge referred to definitions from Law Lexicon and Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary of Words and Phrases.
These sources explain that cultivation includes planting, raising, or growing a plant—whether done in the soil or in a pot.
On the issue of whether Jatin actually lived in the rented building and whether the seized plants had flowering tops, the Court said these were factual questions that must be decided during the trial.
The High Court’s role at this stage was only to check if there was a prima facie case (a case that appears valid on the surface).
ALSO READ: Supreme Court to Revisit “Hira Singh” Judgment on NDPS Act Drug Quantity Rules
The Court finally held that the charges against Jatin clearly suggested an offence under the NDPS Act. It concluded that there was enough evidence for the trial to proceed and therefore dismissed Jatin’s petition.
The Court stated that it was “beyond any pale of doubt” that growing cannabis—whether in soil or in pots—violates the NDPS Act. The key issue is the deliberate act of cultivation, not where or how the plant is grown.
Advocates Suman Chakravarthy, K.R. Rija, Brejitha Unnikrishnan, Surya R, Sudeesh K.E., and Prahladh S.P. appeared for the petitioner Jatin. Senior Public Prosecutor C.S. Hrithwik represented the State of Kerala.
Case Title:
Jatin v. State of Kerala
Read Order:
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
