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) 4276

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Sharma, J.
Deep Chand Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Narcotics Control Bureau – Respondent
Bail Appln. 850 of 2022
Decided On : 31-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nipun Katyal, Mr. Yogesh Saxena and Mr. Shailendra Slaria, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Subhash Bansal, Senior Standing Counsel for NCB with Mr. Raghav Bansal, Advocate, for the Respondent.

Headnote:

BAIL - NDPS ACT - SECTION 22(C), 23(C) & 29 - APPLICANT ARRESTED FOR POSSESSION OF 990 TABLETS OF ATIVAN 2 MG (LORAZEPAM), 1980 TABLETS OF ALPZ 1 MG (ALPRAZOLAM), 450 TABLETS OF CLOX-2 (CLONAZEPAM) AND 600 TABLETS DIZY-10 (DIAZEPAM) - APPLICANT RUNS A COURIER SERVICE AND CLAIMS HE WAS FALSEY IMPLICATED - APPLICANT CLAIMS DELAY IN TRIAL AND DEFECTIVE SAMPLING - COURT HELD THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT HAVE CONSCIOUS POSSESSION OF THE CONTRABAND - COURT GRANTED BAIL.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant was arrested for possession of 990 tablets of Ativan 2 mg (Lorazepam), 1980 tablets of Alpz 1 mg (Alprazolam), 450 tablets of Clox-2 (Clonazepam) and 600 tablets Dizy-10 (Diazepam). The applicant runs a courier service and claims he was falsely implicated. The applicant also claims delay in trial and defective sampling.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the applicant did not have conscious possession of the contraband. The court also held that the delay in trial and the defective sampling were not sufficient grounds to deny bail.

Issues: 1. Whether the applicant had conscious possession of the contraband? 2. Whether the delay in trial and the defective sampling were sufficient grounds to deny bail?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the applicant did not have conscious possession of the contraband because he was not aware of the nature of the substances he was transporting. 2. The court held that the delay in trial and the defective sampling were not sufficient grounds to deny bail because the applicant had been in custody for a significant period of time and the trial was unlikely to be completed anytime soon.

Final Decision: The court granted bail to the applicant.

JUDGMENT

Amit Sharma, J.

1. The present application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seeks regular bail in case no. SC/213/2019, under Sections 22(c), 23(c) & 29 of the NDPS Act, titled `NCB vs. Deep Chand & Anr.' pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, NDPS Act, Patiala House Court, New Delhi.

2. The case of the prosecution is as under:

    "As per the case of prosecution, on the basis of information dated 01.11.2018, a parcel bearing AWB No. 8250438140 lying at DHL Express Private Limited was searched and from the parcel, 990 tables of Ativan 2 mg (Lorazepam) weighing 49.5 grams, 1980 tables of Alpz 1 mg (Alprazolam) weighing 396 grams, 450 tablets of clox-2 (Clonazepam) weighing 90 grams and 600 tablets DIZY-10 (Diazapam) weighing 90 grams were recovered. During inquiries, it was found that the said parcel was booked from overseas courier and from Overseas courier it was found that the said parcel was book from Kavya International, and the said parcel was alleged to be booked by one Bobby. On inquiry from Bobby, he informed that it was booked by accused Deep Chand who will come tomorrow to give another parcel. Thereafter a raiding team was prepared under the directions of Superintendent which met Bobby @ Jitender Kumar thereafter at about 1520 hours, accused Deep Chand was apprehended and a notice u/s 50 NDPS Act was given and he was apprised of his legal rights to be searched in presence of magistrate or gazette officer however accused told that NCB officer can take his search. A key of car was found from his pocket and nothing incriminating was recovered from his pocket thereafter on search of his car, one cardboard box wrapped with brown colour adhesive tape was recovered from the rear seat of the car. Accused Deep Chand disclosed that the said box containing narcotix drugs was sent by accused Gaurav Mendiratta r/o Agra through Apex courier and he has to send the said parcel to USA. On opening the same, 4980 tablets of Zolpidem Tartrate Tablet (Inzofresh-10) weighing 747 grams, 980 tablets i.e. Lonazepam Tablet (Repam-2) weighing 147 grams, 1020 tablets of Lonazepam Tablet (Ativan-2) weighing 51 grams, 980 tablets DIZY-10 (Diazapam) weighing 147 grams and 1980 tablets of Alpz 1 mg (Alprazolam) weighing 396 grams were recovered from the parcel. Statement of accused Deep Chand u/s 67 was recorded. The samples were sent to CRCL for testing. In another case NCB vs. Birpal registered by NCP involvement of accused Gaurav Mendiratta was found. Notice u/s 67 NDPS Act was issued to Gaurav Mendiratta who appeared and made voluntary statement u/s 67 NDPS Act in his own handwriting and admitted that the parcel recovered from the car of accused Deep Chand was sent by him from Agra to Deep Chand and he deposited Rs. 15000/-in the account of 663705500498 with ICICI bank of Sai Courier and Cargo run by accused Deep Chand, thereafter accused was arrested. During search of house at Kamla Nagar, Agra of accused Gaurav Mendiratta, one photocopy of bank account passbook of Canara Bank and Axis Bank were recovered. During investigation, Satyapal disclosed that recovered parcel bearing AWB No. 8250438140 was sent by accused Gaurav Mendiratta to Agra from Apex courier and he accompanied Gaurav Mendiratta."

3. After completion of investigation, complaint was filed and cognizance was taken by the learned Special Judge.

4. Vide order dated 14.11.2019, charges were ordered to be framed and were formally framed on 23.11.2019. It was pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant that the same has been challenged by way of a criminal revision being CRL.REV.P. 1320/20149, pending before a coordinate bench of this Court.

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is the case of the applicant that he runs a courier service and is sole proprietor of M/s Shri Sai Courier and Cargo Services. It is further submit










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