Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
H.B. Prabhakar A Sastry, J.
Mr. Rijesh Ravindran S/o. Kollaikal Ravindran – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India Narcotic Control Bureau represented by its Intelligence Officer – Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition
No.324 of 2021, 325 of 2021
Decided on : 24-05-2021
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 167(2) read with Sections 397 and 401 – Default bail – Whether revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. is maintainable against order passed rejecting application filed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. – Powers of revision conferred by sub-Section (i) of Section 397 shall not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order passed in any appeal, enquiry, trial or other proceeding – Any order which substantially affects right of accused, or decides certain rights of parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order so as to bar a revision to High Court against that order – A final order or an intermediate order is revisable, but not interlocutory orders – Though an intermediate order is an order which is interlocutory in nature, but when reversed has effect of terminating proceeding thereby resulting in a final order – Order passed upon an application filed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. though it touches upon an accused of his personal liberty as to whether he is required to be enlarged on bail, but such an order, if reversed, can, at the best, may result in a finding on his right of appeal but would not result in culmination of a proceeding, resulting in a final proceeding thereby resulting in a final order – Case would continue though accused, whether enlarged on bail or not – Since petitioner has got a specific remedy to redress his grievance for challenging order passed by Special Judge on his application under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. under a different provision of law and said impugned order being an interlocutory order, bar under Section 397(2) of Cr.P.C. applies – As such, revision is not maintainable. (Paras 9, 10, 12, 13 and 14)
(B) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Sections 36A and 53 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 167(2) – Seizure of MDMA tablets – Default bail – Complaint is filed not under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C., but under Section 36A(1)(d) of NDPS Act – Complainant Officer who is Intelligence Officer has been authorised by Central Government under Notification No.S.O.763(E) dated 27-09-1989 and as amended by Notification No.S.O.585(E) dated 25-02-2016 to file a complaint under Section 36A(1)(d) of NDPS Act – Police have filed a complaint within statutory period of 180 days and which complaint is in pari materia to that of a report – Special Court has also taken cognizance of offence alleged against accused which order cannot be found fault with – Criminal Revision Petitions dismissed. (Paras 23, 26, 32 and 33)
Result: Criminal Revision Petitions dismissed.
ORDER
The present petitioner who is common in both the revision petitions is the accused No.3 in Special C.C.No.159/2021, pending on the file of the learned XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru, CCH-33, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the Special Court”), which criminal proceedings was initiated against ten accused persons including the present petitioner by the respondent through its complaint under Section 36A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the NDPS Act”) for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) read with Sections 22 (C), 27, 27A, 28, and 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. The summary of the case of the respondent in the Special Court is that, on 21-08-2020 at 5:50 p.m., the Intelligence Officer of the Narcotic Control Bureau, Bangalore Zonal Unit, Bangalore, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the NCB), received an information that, one Mohammed Anoop (accused No.2), residing in Room Nos.205 and 206 of Royal Suites Hotel Apartment, situated at Kalyan Nagar, Bangalore, has purchased 100 grams of MDMA pills and if search is conducted, the same can be seized. In pursuance of the said information and upon authorisation, the Narcotic Officers conducted search of Room Nos.205 and 206 of Royal Suites Hotel Apartment, Kalyan Nagar, Bengaluru and found 60 grams of MDMA tablets and the same were seized under a panchanama from 10:10 p.m on 21-08-2020 to 00:10 a.m. on 22-08-2020 and arrested the said Mohammad Anoop (accused No.2). He was enquired about the remaining 40 grams of tablets, wherein he is said to have told the Narcotic Officers that, he has given the same to the present petitioner (accused No.3).
It is further alleged in the complaint that, thereafter, the premises at flat No.52401, 24th Floor, Tower No.5, Nikoo Homes 1, Chokkana Halli Village, Bengaluru, was searched by the NCB officials in the same intervening night of 21st and 22nd August 2020, where 40 grams/tablets of MDMA and 180 blots of LSD were found and the same were seized. The MDMA tablets were weighing 40 grams in total and LSD blotter papers were found to be weighing in net 2.9 grams. A panchanama was drawn in the spot in that regard. It was at about 04:40 hours on 22-08-2020, the accused No.3 was issued summons under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, to appear before the NCB for his further enquiry in that regard. On 24-8-2020, the petitioner along with two others were produced before the Special Court in Crime No. NCB.F.No.48/1/14/2020/BZU and got remanded to judicial custody.
3. Thereafter, the investigation was continued by the respondent – NCB officials. On 18-02-2021, the Intelligence Officer, NCB, Bangalore Zonal Unit, Bangalore, filed a complaint before the Special Court against ten accused persons, including the present petitioner as accused No.3 for the alleged offences.
The Special Court, by its order dated 20-02-2021 took cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) read with Sections 22 (C), 27, 27A, 28, and 29 of the NDPS Act, against all the accused persons. Thereafter, the present petitioner (accused No.3) filed an application before the Special Court under Section 167 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as “the Cr.P.C.”), seeking his enlargement on bail in the said crime. However, his application came to be rejected by the order of the Special Court dated 05-03-2021. It is challenging the said order dated 05-03-2021, wherein his application under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. was rejected, the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Revision Petition No.324/2021. Further, challenging the order of the said Court taking cognizance dated 20-02-2021 passed in the said Special C.C.No.159/2021, the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Revision Petition No.325/2021. Since both these revision petitions have arisen out of the same crime number and between the same pa
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
