Mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine are Schedule I controlled substances in Indiana. Possessing either one without a prescription is a Class A misdemeanor, which carries up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000. Delivering or manufacturing it is a felony at any weight, and the felony level climbs with the weight involved and with a defined list of aggravating circumstances.
Indiana gets there in two steps, and neither of them uses the word kratom. The two alkaloids are named in the Criminal Code’s definition of a synthetic drug. Schedule I then takes in that definition whole. Because the definition reaches any substance containing one of the listed compounds, the leaf and the powder are caught through what is in them, not by name.
Step one: the synthetic-drug definition
Section 35-31.5-2-321 of the Indiana Code defines a synthetic drug. Its first paragraph covers “a substance containing one (1) or more of the following chemical compounds, including an analog of the compound”, followed by a long alphabetical list. Two entries on that list read, simply, “7-hydroxymitragynine.” and “Mitragynine.” They sit among synthetic cannabinoids of the JWH family, cathinones such as alpha-PVP and pentedrone, and benzofurans such as 6-APB.
Neither Mitragyna speciosa nor kratom appears anywhere in the definition, in Schedule I, or in the chapter of offences. The plant is reached through its contents.
The definition has a thirteenth paragraph as well: any compound the Indiana Board of Pharmacy determines to be a synthetic drug by rule. So the statutory list is not the whole list. We read the statute and have not read the board’s rules, which could add compounds but cannot remove the two that the statute names.
Step two: Schedule I takes in the definition
Indiana’s Schedule I is in section 35-48-2-4. After its lists of opiates, opium derivatives, hallucinogens, depressants and stimulants, it ends with a short subsection:
(g) Synthetic drugs as defined in IC 35-31.5-2-321.
That one line makes every synthetic drug, including the two kratom alkaloids, a Schedule I controlled substance.
This matters because some summaries of Indiana law describe the kratom alkaloids as sitting in a synthetic-drug definition rather than in the controlled-substance schedules, as though they were a separate and milder category. In the current Code that distinction does not hold. Subsection (g) puts them in Schedule I.
There is a second reason older summaries go wrong. Indiana used to have offences written specifically for synthetic drugs, at sections 35-48-4-10.5 and 35-48-4-11.5. Both were repealed in 2019, by Public Law 80-2019. A page that still cites them is describing a law that no longer exists. The offences that apply now are the general ones for Schedule I substances, set out below.
What possession carries
Section 35-48-4-7 makes it an offence to knowingly or intentionally possess a Schedule I controlled substance, “pure or adulterated”, without a valid prescription or practitioner’s order. Marijuana, hashish and salvia are carved out of that subsection. Synthetic drugs are not.
The offence is a Class A misdemeanor: up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000. It becomes a Level 6 felony where an “enhancing circumstance” applies, which carries six months to two and a half years in prison, with an advisory sentence of one year, and a fine of up to $10,000. Even then, section 35-50-2-7(c) gives the court discretion, subject to exceptions, to enter the conviction as a Class A misdemeanor instead.
“Enhancing circumstance” is defined in section 35-48-1.1-18. It is a closed list of eight: a prior conviction for dealing a controlled substance other than marijuana, hashish, hash oil or salvia; having a firearm; committing the offence on a school bus, or within 500 feet of school property or a public park while a minor was reasonably expected to be there; delivering to someone under 18 who is at least three years younger; manufacturing the drug or financing its manufacture; committing the offence in the presence of a child who might see or hear it; committing it on the property of a penal or juvenile facility; and committing it knowingly within 100 feet of a drug treatment or recovery facility. The definition used to sit in chapter 35-48-1, which was repealed in 2025, so older summaries that cite that chapter are pointing at a provision that has moved.
There is no weight floor for possession. Any amount is enough.
Indiana’s drug code has a first-offence route that ends in dismissal rather than conviction, in section 35-48-4-12. It applies only to possession of marijuana, hashish, salvia or smokable hemp. It does not extend to synthetic drugs, so it does not apply to kratom. A separate, general power does: under section 33-39-1-8(d), a prosecutor may withhold prosecution of a misdemeanor or a Level 5 or Level 6 felony if the accused agrees to a pretrial diversion programme. That is the prosecutor’s choice, not a right.
What delivering or manufacturing carries
Section 35-48-4-2 makes it dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance to manufacture or deliver a Schedule I substance, to finance either, or to possess it intending to do any of those things. The base offence is a Level 6 felony, and it rises with weight:
| Amount of the drug involved | Level | Prison term (advisory) |
|---|---|---|
| Less than 1 gram | Level 6 felony | 6 months to 2.5 years (1 year) |
| 1 gram to less than 5 grams | Level 5 felony | 1 to 6 years (3 years) |
| 5 grams to less than 10 grams | Level 4 felony | 2 to 12 years (6 years) |
| 10 grams to less than 28 grams | Level 3 felony | 3 to 16 years (9 years) |
| 28 grams or more | Level 2 felony | 10 to 30 years (17.5 years) |
Each felony level also carries a fine of up to $10,000. An enhancing circumstance moves an offence up one band, to a ceiling of Level 2.
That has a consequence the table does not show. Manufacturing the drug, or financing its manufacture, is itself one of the enhancing circumstances. So the table as printed describes delivery and possession with intent to deliver. A person who manufactures is always one band higher: manufacturing under 1 gram is a Level 5 felony, not a Level 6.
One limit protects a person who only possesses. A conviction for possession with intent to deliver requires either evidence beyond the weight itself that the person meant to deliver, or an amount of at least 28 grams. Below 28 grams and without that other evidence, a conviction for possession with intent is not available. That limit does not touch an actual delivery, which is dealing at any weight.
The weight question we cannot answer
The bands above are measured by “the amount of the drug involved”, and the statute applies to the drug “pure or adulterated”. The synthetic-drug definition covers a substance containing a listed compound. Read together, those words point toward weighing the material as seized, not the alkaloid inside it.
If that reading is right, the numbers for kratom are severe. A 28 gram bag of leaf powder is about an ounce, and the table puts delivering that amount in the Level 2 band. We have not searched Indiana case law for how courts weigh plant material that contains a listed compound, and we are not going to tell you how an Indiana court would weigh it. What we can tell you is that the statute’s own words do not limit the weight to the alkaloid.
What this means in practice
There is no lawful retail market for kratom in Indiana. Selling it is delivering a Schedule I substance.
Ordering it from another state, or from abroad, does not change the position of the person who receives it. The possession offence is about what a person holds in Indiana, and nothing in it turns on whether the seller acted lawfully where the parcel was posted.
Federal law is a separate question, and on mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine it currently reaches less far than Indiana’s. Our United States page sets out the federal position. Where the two differ, a person in Indiana is subject to both.
How we checked this
We read the chapters of the Indiana Code cited at the top of this page in the 2026 edition published by the Indiana General Assembly. That edition carries amendments made in the 2026 session, including one to the enhancing-circumstance definition.
Before relying on the Schedule I list, we checked that it had rendered in full. It contains heroin, which proves the list is there, and it contains ADB-BUTINACA and 3-methylmethcathinone, recent synthetic substances that prove the edition is current. The synthetic-drug definition was checked the same way: it contains JWH-018 and AB-PINACA, synthetic cannabinoids from different generations.
We did not trace which amendment first added the two kratom alkaloids to the definition, which has been amended eight times since it was added in 2012, so this page does not give a listing date. We did not read Indiana case law or the Board of Pharmacy’s rules.
If you can point us to a later amendment, a rule, or a decision that changes any of this, write to editorial@wikikratom.com and we will update the page and credit the correction.