Point of Law: Section 37 of NDPS Act specifically stipulates certain conditions to be satisfied for purpose of granting bail.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 26/2021 of Excise Enforcement & Anti Narcotic Special Squad, Ernakulam. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 20(b)(ii)C, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

2. The prosecution case is that, on 28.04.2021 at about 3.15 a.m., the accused Nos.1 and 2 were found transporting 140 KG of Ganja in a pickup van with Registration No. KL-09/AF-2210 through Vallarpadam Container Road near Anavathil Junction, Eloor. The petitioner was arrested on the same day, and since then, he has been under judicial detention. This application for regular bail is submitted in such circumstances.

3. Heard Sri.Nireesh Mathew, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.C.S. Hrithwik, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. It is pointed out that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the past more than two years, and the chances of completing the trial in the near future are remote. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and therefore, there is no purpose in keeping the petitioner under detention. The learned counsel for the petitioner also places reliance upon the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajuram vs. State of Bihar, (2023) 1 Supreme 670, Dheeraj Kumar Shukla vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2023 KLT Online 1398 (SC), Mohd Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 (3) KLT 504 (SC) and also on the decision rendered by this Court in Fasil vs. State of Kerala and Another, 2023 (3) KHC 212.

5. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the said application by pointing out that the petitioner was found along with contraband articles. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner was driving the vehicle at the relevant time, and 140 KG of Ganja was found concealed along with the boxes of mangoes kept in the said vehicle. It is also contended that, merely because of the reason that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.04.2021, he cannot be granted bail, as the quantity involved is the commercial quantity, and the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is applicable.

6. I have carefully gone through the records. As far as the allegations raised against the petitioner are concerned, it can be seen that ample evidence could be collected by the prosecution indicating the role of the petitioner. He was driving the said vehicle, and as pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, the contraband article, which is in huge quantity, was found concealed in the vehicle among the boxes of mangoes. Since the quantity is voluminous, under normal circumstances, the same cannot be transported without the knowledge of the person driving the vehicle. Besides the same, there is a confession statement from the petitioner. Indeed, the confession statement by itself cannot be relied on in the light of the decision rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1. However, if there are other materials indicating the role of the petitioner and the same corroborates the admissions in the confession statement, such materials can be relied on. In this case, the facts that the petitioner was found driving the vehicle at the relevant time, and in the said vehicle, the contraband article in huge quantity (140 KG) was found concealed are crucial circumstances, showing the role of the petitioner. Since such quantity makes out a voluminous package, it would be very difficult to conclude that such transportation was made without the knowledge of the person driving the vehicle. Thus, from the materials placed on record, a strong prima facie case as to the involvement of the petitioner is made out, and there is nothing to believe that the petitioner is not involved in the offence and he would not commit the offence in future.

7. While taking a decision on the application for bail in a case involving commercial quantity o