Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Hakkim – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for regular bail under ndps act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding connection to the crime. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. confession of co-accused not substantive evidence. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. burden of proof in drug-related bail cases. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. conditions for granting bail under ndps act. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. petitioner entitled to bail due to lack of evidence. (Para 15 , 16) |
ORDER :
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
This is an application for regular bail filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2. Petitioner is the fourth accused in Crime No.1539 of 2024 of Kodungallur Police Station registered alleging offences punishable under sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25, and 27A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act').
3. According to the prosecution, on 28.10.2024, the first and second accused were found transporting 21.924 Kg of ganja in a car bearing registration No.KL-21-Q-3329 through the National Highway. Subsequently, during investigation, the third accused was arrayed as an accused, alleging that he had paid amounts to purchase a portion of the contraband. The petitioner was also arrayed as
Confessions of co-accused cannot constitute substantive evidence for conviction; hence, absence of solid evidence connects the accused is paramount for bail consideration under the NDPS Act.
The court found reasonable grounds to believe the petitioner is not guilty of drug-related offences, allowing bail despite NDPS Act restrictions.
Acquittal of co-accused creates a presumption of innocence, requiring substantial evidence for continued detention under NDPS Act.
Co-accused statements are inadmissible as evidence, and absence of reasonable grounds for belief in the accused's involvement satisfies bail conditions.
A prima facie case for drug-related offences can exist without possession of contraband if evidence of conspiracy is present, and bail court findings are not binding on trial courts.
The admissibility of evidence, compliance with mandatory provisions, and the applicability of Section 37 of the NDPS Act in determining eligibility for bail.
Statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act are inadmissible as confessions, and bail cannot be granted without evidence of innocence in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics.
Under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail involving commercial quantities can only be granted if the accused shows reasonable doubt of guilt, which the petitioner failed to demonstrate.
The court ruled that the accused, not having possession of seized contraband, were eligible for bail, given no evidence proved their guilt and statutory bail conditions were satisfied.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
