IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.
Shabbir Sobarati Ansari - Applicant
Versus
Union Of India (Narcotics Control Bureau) Thro. Intelligence Control Bureau – Respondent
R/Criminal MISC. Application (For Regular Bail) No. 17279 Of 2023
Decided On : 17-01-2024
NDPS Act - Bail Application - Section 8(c), 22(c), 27(A), 28, 29, 30, 35, 54(A), 54(C) and 54(D) - The court analyzed the provisions and objective of the NDPS Act, highlighting the gravity of drug trafficking and the stringent parameters for granting bail under Section 37 of the Act. The court referred to previous Supreme Court decisions to emphasize the need for reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has not committed an offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The court concluded that the applicant-accused, charged for a commercial quantity of contraband substance, was not entitled to regular bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant-accused was involved in the illegal manufacturing of Alprazolam at a factory and was implicated for his role in the larger drug trafficking conspiracy. The prosecution alleged that the accused was providing logistic support and was part of the conspiracy from the beginning.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant-accused's role in the offence, the gravity of the offence, and the bar of Section 37 of the NDPS Act warranted the rejection of the bail application.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant-accused should be granted regular bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the stringent parameters for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, emphasizing the need for reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has not committed an offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
Final Decision: The court rejected the bail application, concluding that the conditions stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not satisfied and there were no reasonable grounds to presume the accused as not being guilty of the offence.
ORDER :
1. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with the FIR being NCB/AZU/CR-11/2022 registered with the Narcotics Control Bureau, Ahmedabad Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad of the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c), 27(A), 28, 29, 30, 35, 54(A), 54(C) and 54(D) of the NDPS Act.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 25.06.2022 at around 13:10 hours, the Narcotics Control Bureau, Ahmedabad received a tip-off that four persons, namely, Srinivas Karre, Sathyantha Pothuganthi, Mohammad Sahajat Shaikh and Rahul SK are involved in illegal manufacturing of huge quantity of Alprazolam at Parshvanath Dye Chem, Plot C1B, 2409, GIDC, Phase-3, Vapi, Valsad (Gujarat) without having any valid license which is a prohibited substance under the NDPS Act. The said information was, in turn, conveyed to the Assistant Director of NCB, Ahmedabad on the very same day and as per the direction of the Assistant Director of NCB, Ahmedabad Shri Lalit Sharma, JIO, formed a team of officers and staff members and moved towards Vapi. Thereafter, after reaching near the place of offence, two persons were called for to act as the Panchas. Thereafter, the team of the NCB reached to the factory and went inside through the small gate. One person was standing there, who upon asking his name, told his name as Rahul SK. Thereafter, the officer asked Rahul SK about the other persons to which Rahul SK informed that they are sleeping in the rooms on the first floor. Therefore, the officers of the NCB along with the Panchas went to the first floor of the factory with Rahul SK where they found three persons sleeping. Upon asking their names, they disclosed their names as Srinivas Karre, Sathyanna Pothuganthi and Mohammad Sahajat which were matching with the secret information received by the NCB. Thereafter, the said officer introduced himself and the other members of the staff to those persons and informed them about the secret information that they are illegally producing/manufacturing Alprazolam at the said factory to which they agreed and confessed that they are manufacturing the contraband substance Alprazolam in the said factory. Upon asking them about any valid license for carrying out such an activity, they informed that they do not have any such license. Thereafter, upon further inquiry, they told the officers that they are merely a hired persons and that they are doing such an illegal activity under the instructions of Venkatesh Nomula and Rafiqul Shaikh. Thereafter, during the course of investigation, the name of the present applicant-accused came on surface. The role attributed to the present applicant-accused is that he was doing the fabrication work in the factory on the instructions of the co-accused Venkatesh Nomulla and Rafiqul Shaikh. Hence, the impugned FIR.
3. Learned advocate Mr. V.O. Joshi appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant-accused was arrested on 30.07.2022 and since then he is in jail. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi has also submitted that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has also been filed. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi has further submitted that the NCB has registered complaint before the Special Judge, Vapi against total eight persons. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi has submitted that it is the case of the prosecution that all the accused persons, in collusion with each other, have hatched a criminal conspiracy to illegally manufacture the contraband substance Alprazolam/Nordazepam in the factory at Vapi and accordingly have played their individual role. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi has further submitted that so far as the role of the present applicant-accused is concerned, the allegation against the present applicant-accused is that he was doing the fabrication work in the said factory. Except this, no other specific role is attributed to the present applicant-accused. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi has also
The court held that the provisions of the NDPS Act apply alongside the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, and bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act requires clear grounds for believing the accused is not guilt....
The court denied bail under the NDPS Act due to the serious nature of drug trafficking charges and failure to meet statutory conditions, emphasizing public safety and legislative intent.
The judgment establishes the stringent parameters for granting bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the need to satisfy reasonable grounds for believing in the innocence of the accused and ensuring t....
The burden placed on the accused under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for satisfying conditions for bail and the need to adjudicate compliance issues during the trial.
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.