Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Vikas Mahajan, J.
Gajendra Singh @gajender Singh – Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
Bail Appln. 289 of 2023
Decided On : 23-05-2023
NDPS Act - Regular Bail - Sections 22/29 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which require reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The court also referred to the observations of the Supreme Court in Collector of Customs vs. Ahmadalieva Nodira and Babua v. State of Orissa, emphasizing the need for substantial probable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 22/29 of the NDPS Act for possession of a commercial quantity of Tramadol tablets. The prosecution alleged that the tablets were supplied by the petitioner's proprietorship concern. The petitioner contended that he was already in custody for another case at the time of the alleged incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the recovery of Tramadol tablets from the co-accused was of commercial quantity and that there was a missing link to establish the supply by the petitioner. However, considering the material on record and the petitioner's involvement in another case, the court concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to bail.
Issues: The key issues were whether the petitioner could be granted bail despite the recovery of Tramadol tablets from the co-accused and the petitioner's involvement in another case, and whether the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were satisfied.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Collector of Customs vs. Ahmadalieva Nodira and Babua v. State of Orissa, emphasizing the need for reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's bail application, stating that the petitioner was not entitled to bail considering the nature of the allegation, the material on record, and the petitioner's involvement in another case.
JUDGMENT
Vikas Mahajan, J. (Oral)--The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail in FIR No. 307/2021 registered under Sections 22/29 of the NDPS Act, registered at P.S. Kashmere Gate, Delhi.
2. The petitioner who was also in custody in another case was formally arrested in the present case after seeking permission from the court, on 23.09.2021. Since then the petitioner is in custody and the chargesheet in the case has been filed.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 02.06.2021 during patrolling duty SI Deepak, No. D/4545 and ASI Ravinder, No. 294/N checked a taxi car Ertiga Color White No. HR74A4946 which was intercepted at picket near GOP, Kashmere Gate Delhi. During checking of the said taxi, three passengers were found sitting in the said car on the rear seat who seemed frightened and on finding their activities suspicious, the said taxi and passengers were checked properly and the all three persons were found carrying illicit Tramadol Hydrochloride Tablets RL-DOL100 SR in a bag, total 74 boxes each box containing 10 strips having 500 tablets and 5000 loose tablets (total 42000 Tablets).
4. On enquiry, the said persons could not produce any bill/document regarding possession of huge quantity of tablets and disclosed their names as (1) Bohad Singh, (2) Sewak Singh and (3) Vinod. Subsequently, the present FIR was registered and investigation was taken up.
5. During further investigation, statement of cab driver Nisar was recorded who stated that he is an Uber-Ola Cab driver and the cab was booked by Naved and all the above named three persons had boarded his cab for the trip booked by Naved. Accused Naved was arrested at the instance of Cab driver Nisar on 04.06.2021.
6. In the course of further investigation accused Naved disclosed that he is doing this illegal sale-purchase of Tramadol tablets from the last 01 year when he got in contact with accused Bohad Singh and Sewak Singh and realized that there is huge demand of these tablets in black market. Naved disclosed that he buys these tablets from Gaurav, and subsequently accused Gaurav was arrested on the same day i.e. 04.06.2021. Thereafter, on Gaurav's instance sixth accused in the chain namely Narender, who supplied these tablets illegally without bill to Gaurav was arrested 05.06.2021.
7. In so far as the role ascribed to the present petitioner is concerned, perusal of the chargesheet filed by the police reveals that during investigation a notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. and under Section 67 NDPS Act was served on the manufacturer of Tramadol Tablets namely, M/s Orison Pharma International and from the reply submitted by the said manufacturer, it transpired that the relevant batch of tablets was sold to M/s Gajanand Pharma, Vikas Puri, New Delhi vide Invoice No. MFG0732 dated 01.05.2021. On further investigation being made from the Drug Controller, South West Zone, it was found that the petitioner is the proprietor of the concern M/s Gajanand Pharma.
8. As the petitioner was already in custody having been arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau, Delhi in crime case Cr. No. VIII/27/DZU/2021 dated 20.06.2020, the petitioner was taken on remand in police custody for 03 days with the orders of the court.
9. During remand the petitioner gave a statement that the shop in Vikas Puri was taken on rent by one Pramod who is into the business of selling, buying and storing of medicines and the petitioner is carrying the business of trading in medicines along with Pramod, who also has a flat and godown in Noida. Further, during petitioner's remand, shop of the petitioner in Vikas Puri, as well as, godowns of Pramod were searched but nothing was found.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the date of alleged incident, the petitioner was already in custody in connection with another case, therefore, he could not have procured and sold the Tramadol tablets to the co-accused from whom the recovery was made. He further su
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which requires reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offenc....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which focuses on the availability of reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not ....
The limited purpose of examining bail applications under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is to focus on the availability of reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offences ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the strict compliance required for bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the need for 'reasonable grounds' to believe that the accused is not guilty....
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
