IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.G. Uma, J.
Chandrakanth & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition Nos. 305/2021 and 9846/2021
Decided On : 04-03-2022
NDPS Act - Bail - Section 8(c) - Section 20(b)(C)
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the accused being charged under Section 8(c) punishable under Section 20(b)(C) of the NDPS Act for the possession, storage, and distribution of large quantities of ganja. The prosecution's case involved the seizure of ganja at various locations, with the accused being accused of storing, transporting, and distributing the contraband.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had placed reasonable materials to constitute contravention of Section 8(c) punishable under Section 20(b)(C) of NDPS Act against the petitioners, and therefore, denied their bail applications.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had placed reasonable materials to constitute contravention of Section 8(c) punishable under Section 20(b)(C) of NDPS Act against the petitioners, and therefore, denied their bail applications.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail applications of the petitioners.
JUDGMENT
M.G. Uma, J. - The petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 305 of 2021 is accused No. 3 and the petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 9846 of 2021 is accused No. 2 in Crime No. 57 of 2020 of Seshadripuram Police Station, Bengaluru, registered on the basis of first information lodged by the informant Sri. Krishnamurthy M L, which is now pending in Spl.C.C. No. 188 of 2021 on the file of XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS cases, Bengaluru, for contravening Section 8(c) punishable under Section 20(b)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act').
2. The case of the prosecution in brief as set out in the charge sheet is that on 30.08.2020 at about 10.15 a.m., CW1 - the informant received credible information that accused No. 5 is possessing ganja and is near BBMP playground on the backside of Om Shakti Temple, VV Giri Colony and selling the contraband to the general public in his autorickshaw bearing registration No. KA-02 AC 3989. The said information was reduced into writing in the station house dairy and sought permission from CW13 - the Assistant Commissioner of Police to hold a raid and to seize the contraband. After getting necessary permission, CW1 along with other staff and panchas held a raid. CW13 being the Gazetted Officer was present at the spot and the personal search of accused No. 5 was held in his presence. During such search 2.100 kgs of ganja, Rs. 1,500/- in cash and a bag along with the auto rickshaw mentioned above were seized under the seizure mahazar. On enquiry, accused No. 5 gave information that he used to purchase ganja as the same was being supplied to him by accused No. 4.
3. On 06.09.2020 CW1 along with other witnesses went to Madanayakanahalli of Tumkur District, took accused No. 4 to his custody and 200 grams of ganja was also seized from his custody. On enquiry, accused No. 4 informed that he along with accused Nos. 2 and 3 had concealed 150 kgs of ganja in a place dug out which is 8 kms away from Mahagav on the right side of NH 50 leading from Kalaburagi to Bidar, within the jurisdiction of Kamalapura Police Station. Accordingly, accused No. 4 led the police to the spot and produced 150 kgs of ganja before the police, in the presence of mahazar witnesses on 08.09.2020.
4. It is the further contention of prosecution that accused No. 4 further stated that he can identify accused Nos. 2 and 3 and accordingly, identified them when they were near Moodboll Tollgate near Chittapura. Accordingly, accused Nos. 2 and 3 were also taken into custody. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 have informed that they were purchasing ganja from accused No. 1 and used to store in an underground storage dug in Sy. No. 214/2B of Kalagi Taluk of Kalaburagi District situated in Lachu Nayak Thanda belonging to Smt. Manibai. Accordingly, accused Nos. 2 and 3 led the Investigating Officer and the mahazar witnesses to the said place and showed the underground storage where 1,200 kgs of ganja in 600 packets (i.e., 2kgs each) were stored. The said contraband was seized after collecting the sample and the canter bearing registration No. AP-22/X-5948 which was used for transportation of ganja was also seized under the mahazar. It is stated that accused No. 1 used to supply ganja from Orissa to accused Nos. 2 and 3 which was in turn being transported in the canter referred to above belonging to accused No. 2 and being stored in the underground storage in Sy. No. 214/2B belonging to Manibai who is the grand mother of accused No. 3 and thereafter, the contraband was being transported to Bengaluru and other places with the help of accused Nos. 4 and 5 for the purpose of selling it to general public and thereby all the accused have contravened Section 8(c) punishable under Section 20(b)(C) of NDPS Act.
5. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are before this court filing two separate petitions, seeking to enlarge them on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
6. Heard Sri. Hashmath Pasha, learned
Dharam Deo Yadav vs. State of UP
State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Gangula Satya Murthy (1997) 1 SCC 272
State of Kerala and Others vs. Rajesh and Others (2020) 12 SCC 122
The satisfaction of twin requirements under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act is essential for releasing a person accused of an offence involving commercial quantity, even after providing an opportuni....
The court emphasized the limitations on granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the definition of ganja under Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, and the applicability of Section 50 of the NDP....
The main legal point established is the stringent requirement of reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and is not likely to commit any offence while o....
The court emphasized that bail under the NDPS Act requires reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty, especially when dealing with commercial quantities of narcotics.
The compliance with seizure and sampling procedures, the admissibility of cellphone conversations as evidence, and the compliance with Section 50 of NDPS Act were crucial legal points established in ....
The court emphasized strict compliance with Section 37 of the NDPS Act, concluding there were no reasonable grounds for believing the petitioner was not guilty due to his significant role in drug sup....
Sampling of seized contraband has to be done as per Standing Instructions.
Strict adherence to procedural requirements under the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of evidence, impacting the court's decision on bail.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.