The recovery of contraband articles and the commission of an offence under the NDPS Act are crucial in determining bail eligibility, and the quantity of seized contraband and FSL reports play a significant role in the decision.

JUDGMENT

B.A. Patil, J. - Crl.P.No.1117/2020 has been filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 and Crl.P.No.1139/2020 has been filed by accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., to release them on bail in NCB.F.No.48/1/18/2018/BZU(CIS.1322/18) for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) R/w Section 20(b), 28 and 29 of N.D.P.S Act pending on the file of the 33rd Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS Act at Bengaluru.

2. I have heard the learned counsel Sri Shankarappa S appearing for petitioners accused No.1 and 3 Sri Madhukar Deshpande, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The brief facts of the case are as under:

On 12.11.2018, the complainant received credible information that three persons were traveling from Vishakapatnam to Mumbai via Bengaluru in a grey Swift Desire Car bearing registration No.AP-16-BS-189 and they have kept large quantity of ganja with them and they were passing through Devanahalli tollgate. On 13.11.2018, the complainant along with his staff and panch witnesses has intercepted the said car and stopped, on search of the Car, they seized 223.844kgs of ganja and conducted panchanama. The accused persons were arrested and a case has been registered.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the said accused persons have been brought and planted with the vehicle bearing registration No.AP-16-BS-189 though the accused persons have not involved in the alleged crime. It is his further submission that when a case has been registered at Panyam Police Station with another car number and accused persons have been apprehended then the question of apprehending the arrest and seized the large quantity of ganja that itself creates a doubt. It is his further submission that there are no bad antecedents as against the petitioners-accused. Already charge sheet has been filed and the accused persons are not required for the purpose of investigation or interrogation. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition and release the petitioners - accused No.1 and 3 on bail.

5. Per contra, learned Special Standing counsel for respondent vehemently argued and contended that the respondent has apprehended the accused persons and have seized two tones of ganja which has been kept in the Car by drawing mahazar. It is his further submission that the document of the vehicle has been fabricated, false document has been created and the vehicle has been used for the purpose of transportation of huge quantity of ganja. It is his further submission that FSL report clearly given positive result that seized article is ganja. It is his further submission that ownership of the vehicle is immaterial and that large quantity of ganja has been seized from the possession of the accused and the accused persons were present at the time of seizer drawing mahazar. In order to substantiate the case, he has relied upon the judgment of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Rizwan Khan v. State of Chattisgarh,2020 SCCOnline(SC) 730 . It is his further submission that accused No.1 is habitual offender and many more cases have been registered and even proceeding has been initiated under Section 58F(2) of the NDPS Act and the properties and other materials belonging to the accused No.1 have been seized. If petitioners accused are released on bail, they may indulge in similar type of criminal activities. It is his further submission that accused No.1 is the main accused and accused Nos.2 and 3 were assisting in the commission of the offence. If the petitioners-accused are enlarged on bail, they may abscond and they may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the r