Anticipatory bail is denied when sufficient incriminating evidence exists, and the accused is considered a key player in drug trafficking, necessitating custodial interrogation.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 21 - Anticipatory bail application denied - Enough incriminating evidence against the petitioner including disclosure statements by co-accused, significant money transactions associated with drug procurement, and active evasion of law enforcement - The court emphasized that anticipatory bail is to prevent harassment; however, evidence indicated that the petitioner is a key player in an interstate drug syndicate and custodial interrogation is necessary. (Paras 7.1, 10)

Facts of the case:
The applicant seeks anticipatory bail concerning a drug-related charge based largely on the confession of an arraigned co-conspirator linking him to a substantial heroin trafficking operation. (Paras 2, 3.1)

Findings of Court:
The court found substantial links between the petitioner and the co-accused regarding financial transactions that were consistent with drug trafficking activities. (Paras 8.2, 9)

Issues: The primary issues included the sufficiency of evidence for implicating the petitioner in the drug offense and the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail in light of the evidence presented. (Paras 7.1, 10)

Ratio Decidendi: The court delineated the principles guiding anticipatory bail, highlighting that the burden lies on the petitioner to demonstrate a lack of sufficient material for the charges leveled against him, which he failed to do so in this case. (Paras 7.1, 10)

Result: The anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. application for anticipatory bail. (Para 1)
2. details of prosecution case and investigation findings. (Para 2)

JUDGMENT

Poonam A. Bamba, J. Vide this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C, the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail, in case FIR no. 106/2022 dated 09.05.2022, under Section 21 of NDPS Act, registered at PS Special Cell (Delhi).

2. It is the case of the prosecution that secret information was received that one Rajesh resident of Kushi Nagar, UP, used to procure heroine from one Lenminthang (petitioner herein) r/o Manipur on the directions of Shivam and Pankaj r/o Bareilly, UP and deliver it further to their contacts on their directions, would be coming at DDU Marg, Near Gandhi Market, Delhi, to deliver the heroine to one Vishal resident of Trans Yamuna, Delhi between 01.30 pm to 2.30 pm on 09.05.2022. On the basis of the said secret information, a raid was conducted on 09.05.2022 and a trap was laid ; and the accused Rajesh resident of Kushinagar, UP was caught from DDU Marg, near Gandhi Market and was found in possession of a total 5 kg of heroine in his bag. During the course of investigation, a mobile phone was recovered from the possession of the accused Rajesh Gupta, which was kept `ON' for the purpose of investigation ; and some incriminating photographs were found including some slips regarding deposit of money in the account numbers 920020067746042 and 919010030391408 from Bareilly from account no. 922010003796841 through ATM.

2.1. On further investigation, accused Rajesh Gupta disclosed that account numbers 920020067746042 and 919010030391408 belonged to the present petitioner. He stated that Pankaj Verma and Lenminthang asked him to get opened an Axis Bank account for transferring money. He further stated that he told his son-in-law Siya Ram that he has started a business in Manipur with his friends of Bareilly and there is a requirement of an Axis Bank account for transferring money. Upon which, Siya Ram got opened an Axis Bank account in his name vide account no. 922010003796841. Pankaj Verma and Shivam Verma deposited cash money from ATM machine of Bareilly in the said account of Siya Ram. Thereafter, on his directions, his son-in-law Siya Ram transferred that money in the account of the Lenminthang ; and some cash was also deposited in the account of Lenminthang through ATM machine by Pankaj Verma and Shivam Verma. Thereafter, Rajesh Gupta went to Manipur for procuring heroine from Lenminthang/the petitioner herein.

2.2. Status report mentions that during investigation, both the above account numbers 920020067746042 and 919010030391408 were found to be in the name of Lenminthang/petitioner ; and it was found that the accused persons Pankaj Verma and Shivam Verma deposited cash through ATM machine from Bareilly in the above bank accounts of accused Lenminthang and money had also been transferred from account no. 922010003796841 (of Siya Ram), for procuring heroine from Lenminthang. Many other suspicious transactions were also found in the account of Lenminthang.

2.3. Status report further mentions that accused Rajesh Gupta also disclosed that he was court marshalled by Indian Army and his account was freezed by his employer. He also disclosed that pursuant to his court marshal, he remained in Kohima Jail, where he came in contact of Sushil r/o Bareilly, who was also lodged in the said jail in some case of NDPS. Said Sushil introduced him with Pankaj Verma and Shivam Verma, both residents of Bareilly, who indulged in supply of heroine. Accused Rajesh Gupta further disclosed that he used to procure heroine from the petitioner, resident of Manipur on the directions of Shivam and Pankaj.

2.4. Status report mentions that Siya Ram, holder of the account no. 922010003796841 was also examined and he disclosed that he opened the said account in Axis Bank on the directions of his father-in-law Rajesh Gupta, who told him that he has started a business with his friends of Bareilly in