Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Sharma, J.
Lhingneihat Lhouvum – Appellant
Versus
Io, Narcotics Control Bureau & Anr. – Respondents
Bail Appln. 1278 of 2023
Decided On : 25-07-2023
CrPC - Regular Bail - NDPS Act - Section 37 - 21/23/29 - The court discussed the controlled delivery operation, seizure proceedings, voluntary statements, and evidence related to the contraband. The court analyzed the admissibility of the applicant's statement, ownership of recovered mobile phones, and the evidence from mobile data extraction reports. The court also considered the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and relevant case laws. The decision was based on the lack of material indicating the applicant's knowledge of the contraband and the satisfaction of the twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the controlled delivery operation of parcels suspected to contain contraband, the subsequent seizure of heroin, and the arrest of the applicant and co-accused. The applicant sought bail, arguing that she was falsely implicated and had no knowledge of the contraband.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant's statement was inadmissible, the ownership of recovered mobile phones was questionable, and there was no material indicating the applicant's knowledge of the contraband. The court also considered the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and relevant case laws.
Issues: Admissibility of the applicant's statement, ownership of recovered mobile phones, knowledge of the contraband, and satisfaction of the twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The decision was based on the lack of material indicating the applicant's knowledge of the contraband and the satisfaction of the twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Final Decision: The applicant was admitted to bail upon furnishing a personal bond and subject to specific conditions.
JUDGMENT
Amit Sharma, J. The present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'CrPC') read with Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'NDPS Act') seeks regular bail in Sessions Case No. 09/2021, under Sections 21/23/29 of the NDPS Act, titled "NCB v. Martin Chikamma Nwokorie & Anr." pending before the Court of the learned Special Judge (NDPS), Patiala House, New Delhi.
2. The case of the respondent as per the status report dated 19.05.2023, is as under:
i. On 10.07.2020, the competent authority, i.e., Director General of the Narcotics Control Bureau (hereinafter referred to as 'NCB') issued an order to undertake controlled delivery operation of the parcel bearing AWB No. 3449436874 and AWB No. 3449436922 suspected to be containing contraband. For that purpose, Sh. Rampal, Intelligence Officer, NCB-DZU, New Delhi was directed to take action. The parcels originated from Kampala city, Uganda and were destined for Manja, Assam.
ii. In compliance of aforesaid directions, the concerned Investigating Officer alongwith a team, reached at Aramex India Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 211, Bamnoli Village, New Delhi-77 on 11.07.2020 and shared the information about controlled delivery of aforesaid parcels with Sh. Sandeep Saroha, Manager, Security at Aramex India Pvt. Ltd. The Manager checked the system and informed the Investigating Officer that the parcel bearing AWB No. 3449436922 has reached and the second parcel bearing AWB No. 3449436874 is on the way. In the presence of public witnesses-Sh. Neeraj Negi and Sh. Praveen Kumar, the aforesaid parcel-AWB No. 3449436922 was inspected and was intact in a carton box, wrapped/taped with Aramex tape. The carton was found to contain six smaller-sized cardboard boxes wrapped in Aramex tape. On opening the six boxes, all were found to contain LED Lights and on checking/opening the LED Lights, one packet containing an off-white substance was found in each light, concealed beneath the panel of the lights. The packets were removed from all six LED Lights and the said off-white substance from each packet was tested separately with a field-testing kit. The recovered substance tested positive result for `Heroin'. As the substance in all six packets was similar in colour and texture, a lot was made by mixing it homogeneously and the weight of the said substance was recorded as 500 grams.
iii. The box was then packed in its original Aramex wrapping with photocopy of documents pasted on box and it was made ready for controlled delivery.
iv. The seizure proceedings were recorded vide Panchnama dated 11.07.2020, in the presence of public witnesses and the relevant documents pertaining to the parcel bearing AWB No. 3449436922 were also seized, in original.
v. Subsequently, on 14.07.2020, the Investigating Officer, received information from office of Aramex that the intended consignee, i.e., Lhingneihat Lhouvum has requested to collect the consignment bearing AWB No. 3449436922 from Delhi itself. The said consignment was the subject matter of a controlled delivery. Accordingly, a dummy parcel was taken out from the offices of NCB to facilitate delivery to the intended recipient. A team of NCB reached Aramex Office and there, Sh. Sandeep Saroha, Manager at Aramex informed that the intended consignee, namely, Lhingneihat Lhouvum, i.e., the applicant alongwith her friend had arrived and was waiting to collect the consignment bearing AWB No. 3449436922. Based on follow-up actions for controlled delivery, the Aramex staff, in the presence of independent witnesses, had delivered the parcel to Lhingneihat Lhouvum. She admitted that she booked and received the said consignment and also the consignment bearing AWB No. 3449436874. She and her partner, namely, Martin Chikamma were apprehended while taking the delivery of said parcel.
vi. A panchnama was drawn at the spot, in the presence of independent witnesses on 14.
The decision was based on the lack of material indicating the applicant's knowledge of the contraband and the satisfaction of the twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
The court found that significant prima facie evidence indicates the applicant's involvement in drug trafficking and conspiracy, justifying the denial of bail.
The admissibility of evidence, the impact of prolonged incarceration on bail, and the need for substantial evidence to establish allegations.
The judgment establishes the importance of substantial probable causes and conscious possession in determining guilt under the NDPS Act.
The judgment established that the gravity of the offence, the impact of the illicit drug trade, and the concept of conscious possession are crucial factors in determining bail eligibility under the N....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the stringent parameters for granting bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the gravity of drug trafficking offences and the legislative intent to p....
The main legal point established in this judgment is that the statement of a co-accused recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is inadmissible as evidence. The court also emphasizes the importance....
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of liberty and the need to avoid pre-conviction incarceration, balancing the recovery of contraband with the potential innocence of the accused and the impact o....
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
