Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Prakash D.Naik, J.
Waseem Ahmad Bhat - Appellant
Versus
State of Goa - Respondent
Criminal Application (Bail) No. 577 of 2023
Decided On : 21-08-2023
BAIL - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sec. 20(b)(ii)(B), 22(c), 29, 37 - The court discussed the provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) concerning the possession of narcotic drugs, Section 22(c) regarding the penalties for offenses, Section 29 on abetment and conspiracy, and Section 37 which imposes restrictions on granting bail in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics. The court interpreted these sections to conclude that the applicant was in possession of a commercial quantity of MDMA and charas, which warranted the denial of bail under the stringent provisions of the NDPS Act.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought bail after being arrested for possessing 20 grams of MDMA and 225 grams of charas while riding a scooter. The police acted on a tip-off and found the drugs during a search. The applicant claimed he had no knowledge of the drugs and that the scooter did not belong to him.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant was in possession of a commercial quantity of narcotics and that the evidence indicated his involvement in the crime. The court distinguished the applicant's case from that of a co-accused who was a pillion rider and had been granted bail.
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the NDPS Act given the possession of commercial quantities of narcotics and the implications of Section 37 regarding bail restrictions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted if the accused is found in possession of commercial quantities of narcotics, and the evidence presented indicated the applicant's involvement in the crime.
Final Decision: The application for bail was rejected.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
PRAKASH D.NAIK, J - Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondents-State.
2. The Applicant is seeking bail in connection with FIR No. 7/2023 registered with Calangute Police Station for offences punishable under Sec. 20(b)(ii)(B), 22(c) and 29 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (NDPS Act, for short).
3. The case of the prosecution is that the Police received information that two persons are likely to deliver narcotic substance to their respective customer on 16/1/2023 between 23.10 hours to 02.10 hours on a grey colour Honda Activa scooter bearing registration no. GA-11-C-7242. The complainant reduced information into writing and informed about it to Police Inspector, Calangute Police Station. The copy of the information was submitted to the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Porvorim, Goa, with a special messenger. Presence of two panch witnesses was secured and they were informed about the information received by the Police. At about 22.35 hours, the police team reached the spot and waited for the arrival of the persons indulging in narcotic drugs. They noticed Honda Activa scooter near the Radisson Hotel at Sinquerim, Bardez, Goa. It was driven by one male person and the other male person was a pillion rider. The scooter was parked by the side of the road and the said persons were proceeding towards the internal road. The Police team headed towards the said persons and encircled them. They introduced themselves to the said persons. The suspects disclosed their names. One of them was Applicant. He was riding the two wheeler. The suspects were informed about their right to be searched before the Gazetted Officer or the Executive Magistrate. Search of the vehicle was taken. It resulted in finding of polythene bag containing the powder suspected to be MDMA. The suspects confirmed that it is MDMA which was carried by them for the purpose of sale to their prospective customers. The powder was weighed and it was found weighing 20 grams. Testing kit was used for testing MDMA and thereafter the substance was sealed. On further checking the dicky of the scooter, another polythene bag containing black colour sticky substance was found, which was suspected to be charas. The weight was 225 grams. The drug testing kit testified it to be charas. Complaint was registered. Accused were arrested. On completing investigation, the chargesheet was filed.
4. The Applicant preferred an application for bail before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, North Goa, Panaji. The said application was rejected by Order dtd. 19/7/2023.
5. Learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant is in custody for a substantial period of time. Investigation is complete and chargesheet is filed. Applicant has no connection with the crime. The scooter in which the contraband was found, does not belong to the Applicant. The Applicant had married recently and came to Goa for honeymoon. The Applicant is not having any criminal antecedents. He had no knowledge about the drugs found in the scooter. Nothing was found on his person. Charas is of variable quantity. The co-accused Shakil Ahmed Mir has been granted bail by this Court by order dtd. 2/5/2023. Further custody of the Applicant is not necessary.
6. Learned Advocate for the applicant has relied upon the following orders of this Court :
(i) Ashabai w/o. Vishnu Makale and anr. vs. The State of Maharashtra (Bail Application No. 138 of 2021) decided on 9/3/2021.
(ii) Bakhtuyarkhan @ Raja s/o. Jahangirkhan and anr. vs. State of Maharashtra (945 Bail Application No.1256 of 2021) decided on 16/11/2021.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the Applicant was driving the bike. The case of the co-accused who has been granted bail can be distinguished. He was a pillion rider. Benefit of being a pillion rider has been granted to him. The scooter was in possession of the Applicant. The statement of
AI
Under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail is not permissible for offenses involving commercial quantities of narcotics, emphasizing the stringent nature of the law in drug-related offenses.
A person may be granted bail if there is insufficient evidence to link them to the alleged crime and if they pose no risk of absconding or tampering with evidence.
The court ruled that statutory bail is granted when the investigation is pending beyond 60 days post-arrest, despite the nature of the charges.
The court emphasized that the seriousness of the charges and the applicant's history justified denying bail.
Bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act requires belief in the accused's innocence and lack of risk for further offenses.
Intermediate quantity NDPS offence with completed investigation warrants bail absent linking evidence.
For offenses involving commercial quantities under the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless the court is satisfied there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty, considering th....
Insufficient evidence to connect the applicant with the crime permits bail under the NDPS Act.
The court granted bail based on prolonged incarceration and non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, emphasizing the right to personal liberty under Article 21.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
