IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized that bail is the rule and jail the exception, allowing bail when evidence is insufficient to sustain charges under the NDPS Act.

ORDER :

This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.

2. The petitioner is the 7^th accused in Crime No.344/2024 of Chengamanadu Police Station, Ernakulam. The above case is registered against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3. The prosecution case is that, the accused 1 to 3 hatched a criminal conspiracy with the other accused, and the 4^th accused rented out a ZOOM car bearing No. KL-07-CW-0888 and reached Bangalore on 03.05.2024. Thereafter they stayed at Royal Platinum Suits in HSR Layout 2^nd sector, and from there, from the 8^th accused, they purchased 100 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride. When they returned from there on 06.05.2024 and reached Kariyad, CW10 to CW16 tried to stop the vehicle, but the accused did not stop the vehicle. Later, when CW1 tried to stop the vehicle on the basis of the information received by him at 10:45 AM near Chengamanad junction, the accused 1 to 3 threw away a plastic cover that contained 100 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride. Thereafter, the police party seized the said contraband from the roadside. At that time the car was driven by the 2^nd accused. Then accused 1 to 3 escaped with the car, and the 5^th and 6^th accused concealed the car bearing No. KL-07-CW-0888, which was used for the commission of the offence. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. The allegation against the petitioner who is the 7^th accused is that he arranged another car to escape accused Nos.1 to 3.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he arranged a car for escaping accused Nos.1 to 3. The counsel submitted that no contraband is seized from the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody from 07.05.2024. It is submitted that he was on interim bail for a short period. The counsel also submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any condition, if this Court grant him bail. It is also submitted by the counsel that the observations in paragraph No.4 of Annexure-4 order by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, North Paravur to the effect that the petitioner who is the 7^th accused is involved in 6 other crimes including NDPS case is factually incorrect.

6. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is also involved in this case and the offences alleged against the petitioner include Section 29 of the NDPS Act also. He also submitted that there is telephonic communication between the petitioner and the other accused, in addition to the evidence that, the petitioner arranged a car to accused Nos.1 to 3 for escape.

7. When this bail application came up for consideration on 18.03.2025, this Court passed the following order:

“Public Prosecutor will get the details of the cases registered against the petitioner, because, it is submitted by the Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is involved in six other cases as per the report received by him.

2. It is also submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that the only allegation against the petitioner, who is the 7th accused is that he arranged another car to escape accused Nos. 1 to 3. The Public Prosecutor will verify the same also.

Post on 24.03.2025.”

8. Today, when the matter came up for consideration, the Public Prosecutor submitted that no criminal antecedents is there against the petitioner as per the report submitted by the Investigating Officer. The observation in paragraph No.4 of Annexure-4 order is not correct. What remains is the allegation against the petitioner. According to the prosecution, the petitioner facilitated accused Nos.1 to 3 to escape and he provided a car to them. According to the prosecution he drove the car with accused Nos.1 to 3. It is als