SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 4492

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.
Emmanuel William – Appellant
Versus
Narcotics Control Bureau – Respondent
Bail Appln. 3203 of 2021
Decided On : 10-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Amit Dwivedi, Mr. Adarsh Priyadarshi, Mr. Gaurav Arya and Mr. Sachin Tanwar, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Bansal, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Shashwat Bansal, Advocate, for the Respondent.

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 alleged offence.

Headnote:

NDPS Act - Bail Application - Section 439 Cr.P.C. - Section 21C/23/29 NDPS Act

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case registered under Section 21C/23/29 NDPS Act. The Narcotics Control Bureau conducted a controlled delivery operation and seized contraband from various parcels. The petitioner was alleged to be involved in drug trafficking and was arrested.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the strict conditions for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not satisfied. The court considered disclosure statements of co-accused, recovery of contraband in commercial quantity, statements of recovery witnesses, ongoing trial, and other evidences. The court concluded that there were no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner was not guilty of the offence and that he would not indulge in the same crime if released on bail.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which impose strict conditions for granting bail. The court considered the latest law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of 'N.C.B. v. Mohit Aggarwal' and emphasized the need for credible and plausible grounds to believe that the accused person is not guilty of the alleged offence.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail application, stating that the twin conditions set out in Section 37 of the NDPS Act for granting bail were not satisfied.

ORDER

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in case being SC No.67/2021 registered under Section 21C/23/29 NDPS Act.

2. The factual matrix in the present case is that on 27.08.2020, the Narcotics Control Bureau (hereinafter "NCB") directed Mr. Chetan Sharma, Investigating Officer, for carrying out controlled delivery operation of parcels bearing Airway Bill No. 1735174092 and PPA32016193974 lying at the Cargo Terminal, IGI Airport, New Delhi. Accordingly, on 01.09.2020, search operation was conducted, and the investigating team seized 970 grams of heroin and collected samples of substance found in parcels bearing Airway Bill No. PPA32016193974 (hereinafter "impugned parcel"). It is further stated that the investigating team conducted a controlled delivery of subject parcel, which was received by another co-accused namely Wahid Ali.

3. On 02.09.2020, Wahid Ali was arrested and his statement under Section 67 NDPS Act was recorded. During inquiry, various incriminating documents were found in his phone including images of invoice pertaining to parcel bearing no. AWBY Y0032216496 containing drugs (hereinafter "second parcel"), which he disclosed was due to arrive on 04.09.2020.

4. On 04.09.2020, another search was conducted by the NCB team at Hotel Shalimar near IGI Airport where co-accused person namely, Muhsin Ali was staying in room no. 301 along with three other persons namely Muhammed Haneef T, Muhammed Shajahan PP, and Munasir Ek. All the three co-accused were arrested on the recovery of five grams of Heroin from a bag in the room. Further, certain information was disclosed by the co-accused Muhsin Ali, which was recorded and thereafter, he was arrested by the Investigating Officer.

5. On 04.09.2020, a disclosure report was prepared wherein it was disclosed that co-accused Muhsin Ali was supposed to receive the second parcel and was required to deliver it to Frank's Girlfriend, namely, Bethlehem alias Nunu at Nawada Metro Station at 5 pm on the said date. At 5:15 pm, search was conducted at Nawada Metro Station and Bethlehem came to receive the second parcel.

6. Upon being apprehended, she disclosed that a person named Emmanuel Williams (petitioner herein) who would be receiving the first parcel from co-accused Wahid Ali. Bethlehem further disclosed that she was working with Peter Chibuzor alias Frank and Emmanual Williams (petitioner herein)

7. The Investigating Officer along with Bethlehem reached the Church at Sector 9, Dwarka in Ambarahi Village where the petitioner came to collect the parcel from Bethlehem. The petitioner came near Bethlehem and enquired about the parcel, at which point the NCB Team apprehended him. Thereafter, the petitioner disclosed that he had come to receive the parcel at the instance of his friend Peter Chibuzor@Frank who resides in Greater Noida.

8. The Investigating Officer served the Notice under Section 67 NDPS Act to the petitioner to tender his voluntary statement which was recorded on 04.09.2020. He disclosed that he had been doing the business with Peter and also disclosed that he knew Bethlehem who was Peter's girlfriend and was getting forged ID's for him.

9. On 05.09.2020, the petitioner was arrested. Subsequently on 15.09.2020, Peter was arrested at the instance of Bethlehem and his disclosure statement was recorded. He disclosed his drug business relations with the petitioner and Bethlehem. On 17.09.2020, the disclosure statement of co-accused Peter was recorded again. On 01.03.2021, Intelligence Officer filed the complaint case bearing SC no. 67/2021 under Section 8(c)/21(c)/23/29 of the NDPS act before the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts and subsequently on the same day cognizance was taken by the ASJ against all accused persons including the petitioner.

10. I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner, Ld. Sr. Standing Counsel for NCB, perused the Status Report filed by the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top