IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Kenechukwu Joseph – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Bail Appln. 352 of 2023
Decided On : 21-09-2023
NDPS Act - Bail Application - Section 439 of Cr.P.C. - Section 21 c of NDPS Act and 14 of Foreigners Act - Section 37 of NDPS Act
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 21 c of NDPS Act and 14 of Foreigners Act. The petitioner was found in possession of 140 grams of cocaine and was alleged to be a permanent resident of Nigeria without valid documents for stay in India. The petitioner claimed innocence and raised issues regarding the arrest, sampling procedures, and tampering of evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, relevant case laws, and previous judgments related to sampling procedures and non-compliance. The court concluded that the issues raised by the petitioner regarding sampling procedures and tampering of evidence are matters to be examined during the trial. The court found that the petitioner is not entitled to bail and dismissed the bail application.
Issues: The issues raised included the validity of the arrest, sampling procedures, tampering of evidence, and the applicability of Section 37 of NDPS Act for granting bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the satisfaction required under Section 37 of NDPS Act for granting bail involves recording reasonable grounds for believing in the accused's innocence and the unlikelihood of committing further offenses. The court also highlighted the need to examine issues related to sampling procedures and tampering during the trial.
Final Decision: The bail application was dismissed, and the petitioner was not granted bail.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail in FIR bearing No.20/2020 dated 16.01.2020 at PS Paschim Vihar, (West), Delhi registered under Section 21 c of NDPS Act and 14 of Foreigners Act.
2. Facts in brief, as stated in the status report are that on 16.01.2020, a secret information regarding carrying of narcotics substance was received in the office of special staff. Upon receiving the information, a team was constituted and at about 07:00 PM a trap was laid down near the service road, DDA ground, Hotel Radisson Blu, Paschim Vihar Delhi. One person was sighted coming from Sunder Vihar side and on the instance of the informer, he was apprehended. Allegedly he was identified as Kenechukwu Joseph s/o Okeke IGA, being a permanent resident of Anambra State, Nigeria, staying at H No. 237, Third Floor, Vipin Garden, Dwarka Mor, Delhi. On searching him one poly bag containing narcotics substance/contraband was recovered from his possession. On checking the narcotics substance by testing Kit, it was found cocaine and the total weight found was 140 grams. Thereafter, two samples of 5 gram each were extracted and both the samples and remnants of 130 grams of cocaine was seized in the case. Subsequently, the present case was registered and investigation of the case was taken up.
3. Further during the course of the investigation, the site plan was prepared. The present accused Kenechukwu Joseph was found permanent resident of Nigeria and no valid documents regarding his stay in India were produced by the accused Kenechukwu Joseph. Thereafter accused Kenechukwu Joseph was arrested in the present case. On 17.01.2020 an application u/s 52 A NDPS Act was moved before the Hon'ble Court of Ms. Neetu Nagar, Ld. MM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi wherein two samples of 5 grams each was extracted from the recovered remnants of 130 grams. On checking the weight of both the samples with lid, it was found as 11.3 grams (6.3+5 gm) & 15.6 gm respectively. The remaining 118.6 gram was also seized and deposited in the malkhana of PS- Paschim Vihar West, Delhi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused is entitled to be admitted to bail as he is in custody since 16.01.2020. It has been submitted that the accused is shown to have been arrested on 16.01.2020 from the service road near the Hotel Radisson, Paschim Vihar whereas he was picked up from the dining area of Hotel Radisson, Paschim Vihar where he had gone for dinner along with his three other friends and the petitioner/applicant is falsely framed in the present case. Learned counsel submits that the arrest has been shown at the service road so as to avoid the CCTV coverage of the Hotel Radisson, Paschim Vihar. Learned counsel further submits that there is a contradiction in the case of the prosecution regarding the receipt of the secret information and recording of the DD entry. It has further been submitted that the IO had moved an application for the proceedings under Section 52A of the NDPS Act before the learned M.M. and an inventory was produced and the Hon'ble court has drawn two samples S1 and S2 of 5 grams each from the alleged contraband and the weight of samples drawn in the court without a lid was 11.3 gram (i.e. 6.3 + 5 gram) and 15.6 gram (including the weight of the sample, boxes with lids of pink and blue colour).
5. Learned counsel has also submitted that sample S-1 containing 5 grams of recovered alleged cocaine was deposited in FSL, Rohini vide FSL: SFSLDLH/602/CHEM/190/20 dated 20/01/2020 by Ct. Pawan PIS No. 28080268, PS Paschim Vihar West. It has further been submitted that as per the FSL report dated 19.03.2020, the exhibit sample S1 sent along with the FSL, containing 5 grams of recovered alleged cocaine deposited to FSL, Rohini was weighing 20.47 grams, not 15.6 grams.
6. Learned counsel further submitted that as per the testimony of PW3 nam
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the defective sampling procedure at the time of recovery and seizure of contraband can be challenged during the trial before the Special Judge....
Seizure of contraband drugs – Even if it is shown that procedure under Section 52A of NDPS Act is not followed, accused does not automatically become entitled to bail as a matter of right.
The court reaffirmed that non-compliance with procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A, does not automatically entitle an accused to bail; the court must still find reasonab....
Procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence, and failure to adhere to these provisions can lead to the grant of bail.
Procedural non-compliance in drug seizure cases can lead to bail being granted, especially when the accused has been in custody for an extended period without trial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that possession of commercial quantity contraband invokes the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, precluding bail. The judgment also emphasizes t....
Non-compliance with procedural rules does not automatically render actions null and void, and the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, ruling that non-compliance can render evidence inadmissible and affect bail decisions.
Procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial; failure to adhere to Section 52A can lead to the inadmissibility of evidence and impact bail decisions.
Procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial; failure to adhere to sampling and inventory requirements can undermine the prosecution's case and justify bail.
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.