India's cannabis laws in 2026: what the NDPS Act, the Delhi High Court order, and AYUSH guidelines mean for you

Introduction: why India's cannabis laws are in the spotlight in 2026

India's relationship with cannabis is older than most countries' legal systems. Ancient Ayurvedic texts describe Vijaya (cannabis) as a plant with a range of traditionally recognized uses.

Yet for decades, a single federal law cast a long shadow over the entire plant, leaving most Indians with the impression that cannabis was simply illegal, full stop.

That impression is incomplete, and 2026 is the year it is being tested most directly.

Reports from early 2026 indicate that the Delhi High Court issued an order asking the central government to review the cannabis-related provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, with a policy decision reportedly due by July 2026.

Readers should verify the current status of this order independently, as proceedings may have developed since this article was written. The order has triggered a wave of news coverage, much of it inaccurate.

No law has changed yet. Cannabis has not been legalized. But the legal picture is more detailed than a simple yes or no, and it has been that way since 1985.

Ayurvedic use of Vijaya sits in a distinct legal space, one that already permits AYUSH-certified formulations to reach consumers through a regulated channel.

This article explains where the law actually stands today, what the court order reportedly directed, how different parts of the cannabis plant are treated differently under Indian law, and what the July 2026 deadline could realistically change for Ayurvedic wellness products.

What the NDPS Act actually says about cannabis

The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) is the central law that governs controlled substances in India. When people say cannabis is illegal in India, they are usually referring to this law. What the law actually says is more specific.

The NDPS Act defines cannabis in three distinct forms. Ganja refers to the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, excluding seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops. Charas is the separated resin extracted from the cannabis plant, including hashish oil.

The Act prohibits both ganja and charas for general use.

Bhang, the preparation made from the leaves and seeds of the cannabis plant, receives different treatment. The NDPS Act does not include bhang in its definition of cannabis, which means it falls outside the Act's central prohibition.

Regulation of bhang is left to individual states, which is why licensed bhang shops operate openly in states like Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.

The NDPS Act does not impose a blanket ban. Section 14 of the Act explicitly permits cultivation for medical, scientific, industrial, and horticultural purposes, subject to central government authorization.

Hemp cultivation, which uses low-THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, the primary psychoactive compound in cannabis) varieties, has been permitted in Uttarakhand since 2017 under this provision, following the state's Industrial Hemp Policy of that year.

The common misconception that cannabis is completely illegal in India collapses when you read the Act carefully. What the Act prohibits is recreational use of ganja and charas. What it permits, under the right authorizations and regulatory frameworks, includes medical, scientific, industrial, and traditional Ayurvedic use.

The January 2026 Delhi High Court order explained

Reports from early 2026 indicate that a bench of the Delhi High Court issued an order in a case raising questions about the medical and therapeutic use of cannabis under Indian law.

The court reportedly did not strike down any provision of the NDPS Act and did not legalize cannabis in any form. What it reportedly did was direct the central government to undertake a structured review.

According to those reports, the court directed the following. The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) director general was asked to coordinate stakeholder consultations, bringing together medical professionals, researchers, Ayurvedic practitioners, policy experts, and relevant ministries.

The government was asked to review the NDPS Act provisions that relate to cannabis, particularly those governing medical and scientific use. A policy decision was to be placed before the court by July 2026. Readers should verify these details independently, as the proceedings may have developed further.

The weight of such an order, if confirmed, lies in its procedural character. A High Court directing a government review with a named deadline and a named coordinating officer creates accountability. It is not the same as a legislative change, but it is not easy to ignore either.

What has not changed is the law itself. As of the date of this article, the NDPS Act remains in its current form. No new licenses have been issued, no new categories of use have been created, and no existing prohibition has been lifted.

Readers who have seen headlines suggesting cannabis is now legal in India should treat those headlines with caution. The court created a process, not an outcome.

How different parts of the cannabis plant are treated under Indian law

Understanding Indian cannabis law requires thinking about the plant in parts rather than as a whole. The law draws sharp distinctions between different components, and those distinctions carry very different legal consequences.

Ganja, the flowering tops of the female cannabis plant, carries the strictest controls. Possession, sale, purchase, transport, and use of ganja without authorization under the NDPS Act is a criminal offense. Penalties scale with quantity, ranging from six months imprisonment for small quantities to up to twenty years for commercial quantities.

Readers with specific legal questions should consult a qualified legal professional.

Charas, the resin form, receives equal severity. This includes preparations commonly known as hashish. The same penalty structure applies.

Bhang occupies a different position. Because the NDPS Act excludes leaves and seeds from its definition of cannabis when not accompanied by the tops, bhang falls outside federal prohibition. States may regulate it as they choose. Rajasthan operates licensed bhang vends, particularly around religious festivals.

Uttar Pradesh has a long history of state-regulated bhang sale. A traveler buying bhang lassi from a licensed shop in Jaipur is not violating the NDPS Act.

Hemp, defined internationally as cannabis with a THC content below 0.3%, is treated as an industrial and agricultural crop in states that have authorized its cultivation. Uttarakhand became the first Indian state to permit industrial hemp cultivation in 2017, issuing licenses to farmers for fiber and seed production.

The state has since expanded its hemp program, and other states have studied similar frameworks.

The cannabis plant's seeds are also generally excluded from the NDPS Act's strictest provisions, provided they are not accompanied by flowering tops. This distinction matters for hemp seed oil, hemp seed protein, and related food and cosmetic products.

Vijaya, as recognized in classical Ayurvedic texts and by the AYUSH Ministry, refers to the whole plant in a traditional therapeutic context. Its legal standing flows not from the NDPS Act alone but from the intersection of the NDPS Act, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and AYUSH regulatory frameworks.

That intersection is discussed in detail in the section below.

State-by-state snapshot: where cultivation and use are permitted

India's federal structure means that cannabis regulation is not uniform across the country. The NDPS Act sets the central framework, but states hold significant authority over bhang regulation, hemp cultivation licensing, and the implementation of medical or Ayurvedic use policies. The table below summarizes the current position in key states.

This table reflects the position as of mid-2026 based on publicly available state policies and the NDPS Act framework. State policies can change, and readers with specific questions about their state should consult a qualified physician or legal professional.

Where AYUSH and Vijaya fit into the legal framework

The AYUSH Ministry (Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy) operates a regulatory framework that is distinct from the NDPS Act's prohibition regime. This distinction is the key to understanding how Ayurvedic Vijaya products are legally available in India today.

Vijaya is listed as a classical ingredient in the Ayurvedic Formulary of India and in traditional texts including the Charaka Samhita and Sushruta Samhita. The AYUSH Ministry recognizes Vijaya as a legitimate Ayurvedic ingredient with a documented history of traditional use.

This recognition places it within the regulatory scope of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, under the provisions governing Ayurvedic, Siddha, and Unani drugs.

The Drugs and Cosmetics Act allows Ayurvedic formulations containing Vijaya to be manufactured, sold, and dispensed under specific conditions. Manufacturers must hold a valid AYUSH manufacturing license. Formulations must conform to pharmacopoeia standards. A qualified Ayurvedic physician must oversee dispensing, or the channel must include physician oversight.

This is the regulatory track on which AYUSH-certified Vijaya wellness formulations operate. They are not operating in a legal gray area. They operate under a specific, recognized exemption that flows from the intersection of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the NDPS Act's provisions for medical and scientific use.

For consumers, this means that buying an AYUSH-certified Vijaya oil or formulation from a licensed brand, through a channel that includes a physician consultation, is a lawful activity in India.

The product should carry valid AYUSH certification, the buyer should obtain it through a proper channel, and a qualified physician should be involved in the process.

It is worth being clear about what AYUSH certification does not mean. It does not mean the product is approved to treat, cure, or prevent any specific disease. It means the product meets the manufacturing and ingredient standards set by the AYUSH regulatory framework for traditional Ayurvedic formulations.

Benefits are framed as traditionally used support, not as medical guarantees.

What the July 2026 deadline could mean for Ayurvedic wellness products

The Delhi High Court's reported July 2026 deadline asks the central government to present a policy decision on cannabis regulation. What that decision might look like is genuinely uncertain. Three broad paths are plausible, and each carries different outcomes for AYUSH-certified Vijaya products.

The first path is status quo. The government may respond to the court with a detailed report acknowledging the existing framework, noting the AYUSH and Drugs and Cosmetics Act provisions that already permit regulated Ayurvedic use, and declining to make broader changes to the NDPS Act.

In this scenario, nothing changes for AYUSH-certified Vijaya products. They continue to operate under the current framework, which already supports their legal availability.

The second path is limited reform. The government may introduce targeted amendments or new guidelines that clarify and expand the medical and Ayurvedic use provisions of the NDPS Act. This could include clearer licensing pathways for Vijaya cultivation for AYUSH purposes, expanded access through Ayurvedic pharmacies, or updated pharmacopoeia standards.

For AYUSH-certified brands, this path would likely mean a more workable regulatory environment and potentially wider availability of formulations.

The third path is a broader review. The government may commission a longer-term policy process, potentially involving a committee or expert group, with recommendations due after July 2026. This path would extend the period of uncertainty but would also signal a more serious engagement with the question of cannabis policy reform.

All three paths share one feature: AYUSH-certified Vijaya formulations are unlikely to face new restrictions as a result of this process. The court's reported order was framed around expanding access and clarifying regulation, not tightening it.

The AYUSH framework's existing recognition of Vijaya as a classical ingredient provides a firm foundation regardless of which path the government chooses.

Readers should treat any specific prediction about the July 2026 outcome with caution. Policy processes of this kind often move more slowly than court deadlines suggest, and the final shape of any change will depend on consultations that are still ongoing.