IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.
Dipti Purty @ Sunita - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Bail Appln. 3208 of 2020
Decided On : 23-11-2021
Bail Application - NDPS Act - Sections 18/29/61/85 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and the stringent parameters for the grant of bail under the Act. It highlighted the requirement of 'reasonable grounds to believe' that the accused has not committed an offence and is not likely to commit an offence while on bail. The court emphasized the seriousness of the offence under the NDPS Act and the need to curb drug-trafficking.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case under Sections 18/29/61/85 of NDPS Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was found carrying a commercial quantity of opium.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the bail application, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence under the NDPS Act and the stringent parameters for the grant of bail. It noted that the petitioner was found carrying a commercial quantity of opium, and therefore, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act applied in this case.
Issues: Delay in completion of proceedings, violation of mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, and the petitioner's entitlement to bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the requirement of 'reasonable grounds to believe' that the accused has not committed an offence and is not likely to commit an offence while on bail, as per Section 37 of the NDPS Act. It also noted that the seriousness of the offence under the NDPS Act and the need to curb drug-trafficking influenced the decision to dismiss the bail application.
Final Decision: The bail application was dismissed, and the court clarified that its decision did not express any opinion on the merits of the case.
ORDER
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. The present bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 44/2015 under Sections 18/29/61/85 of NDPS Act registered at P.S. Special Cell Delhi.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that some mobile numbers i.e. 9582461280, 9654123551, 7351687855 and few others used by suspicious persons suspectedly indulging in illegal activities were under lawful interception in the office of Special Cell/NR, Sector- 06, Rohini, Delhi. During interception of these mobile numbers, efforts were made to identify these suspicious persons from technical surveillance. During this process users of above mentioned mobile numbers were found indulged in drug trafficking activities and they used to visit Delhi frequently. Although users of these mobile numbers were very cautious about their conversation and they used code words and sometimes they communicate through SMS but some time they were heard talking about quality, rate and quantity of drugs.
3. SI Jeetendra Tiwari was deputed to monitor the interception of above mobile numbers and he used to brief Insp. Attar Singh about the outcome of said interception. Insp. Attar Singh, himself also used to monitor the interception and he had lodged DD No. 34 dated 27/06/2015 in Special Cell/NR and said DD entry was put up before ACP/Special Cell. SI Jeetendra Tiwari had deputed his sources to collect intelligence about members of above syndicate.
4. On 28/06/2015, at about 05:00 PM, SI Jeetendra Tiwari had received secret information in office of Special Cell/NR through one of sources already deployed by him that Musfique Alam, a resident of Bihar and one lady, a resident of Assam, who used to supply opium from Assam and thereafter they further used to hand over the same to one of their contact in Delhi, would come at about 06:00 PM to 07:00 PM, near ISBT, Kashmiri Gate, Foot-over bridge, towards Yamuna side.
5. SI Jeetendra Tiwari immediately reduced aforesaid information in writing upon a separate piece of paper and told Inspr. Attar Singh about the said information in his office and introduced him with the informer. Inspr. Attar Singh verified said information from informer and he further passed said information to ACP/Special Cell/NR, telephonically at his residence who directed to take appropriate action as per law. SI Jeetendra Tiwari lodged DD No. 07 at 05:15 PM in this regard and later on copy of the said DD entry and information recorded on a separate piece of paper was put up before ACP/Special Cell/NR through Insp. Attar Singh.
6. A raiding party led by SI Jeetendra Tiwari, apprehended Musfique @ Babloo S/o Faruk Alam R/o H No 134, Mandel, Anchal Baisi, Distt Purnea, Bihar and a lady as Dipti Purtti @ Sunita (present petitioner) w/o Jochef Purtti R/o Ward No-03, Golaganth, Assam. SI Jeetendra Tiwari disclosed the identity of police to both the accused persons. Written notices u/s 50 NDPS Act were served upon them in this regard. Mushfiqe Alam was made to understand the contents of notice and meaning of gazzetted officer and magistrate. They did not express their desire to be searched before any gazzetted officer or magistrate or to take search of any member of raiding party or police vehicle prior to their own search. Both of them express their inability to write. On this, SI Jeetendra Tiwari recorded their refusal in this regard upon original copy of notice u/s 50 NDPS Act in his own hand writing.
7. Thereafter SI Jeetendra Tiwari took bodily search of Mushfique Alalm. SI Jeetendra Tiwari took a brown (khaki) colour pithoo bag from Mushfque Alam and checked it. On checking one transparent jar having black colour substance in semi-solid form was found in the said bag alongwith the cloths. Recovered substance was checked with testing kit and it was found to be opium. On weighing upon electronic scale, opium alongwith transparent jar was found 5.250 kgs. Thereafter, SI Jeetendra Tiwari took on
The stringent parameters for the grant of bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the requirement of 'reasonable grounds to believe' that the accused has not committed an offence and is not likely to co....
The court denied bail under the NDPS Act due to the serious nature of drug trafficking charges and failure to meet statutory conditions, emphasizing public safety and legislative intent.
The judgment emphasizes the strict conditions for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, requiring credible and plausible grounds to believe that the accused person is not guilty of the alle....
Points of law : Grant or rejection of bail under the NDPS Act is governed by Section 37 of the Act. Under Section 37 of the Act, the court before granting bail has to be satisfied that there are reas....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the stringent conditions for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, especially for offences involving commercial quantity of contraband su....
The recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband and the refusal to be searched in the presence of a gazetted officer or magistrate can implicate an individual in the conscious possession of the c....
The judgment establishes the stringent parameters for granting bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the need to satisfy reasonable grounds for believing in the innocence of the accused and ensuring t....
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.