IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
Tawkeer Ahmad Hajam – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&K – Respondent
Bail Application No. 23 of 2021
Decided On : 19-05-2021
NDPS Act - Sections 8, 20 and 29 and 37 - Commission of offences - During naka checking two persons carrying bags in their hands were coming from village towards main road - Moment these two persons reached close to naka party, both of them moved back and tried to flee from spot. They were chased and apprehended along with their bags which they were carrying and on their search, charas like substance in form their possession and during questioning they disclosed their names as Tauqeer and about 550 gms charas like substance in 04 cakes was recovered from his possession and another accused revealed his name as Jameel and from his possession, 1 Kg 900 grams charas like substance was recovered in form of 10 cakes - Whether alleged contraband falls within category of commercial quantity or not.
Finding of the Court:
It is evident that 550 grams of charas was recovered from applicant and 1 Kg 900 grams of charas was revered from other co-accused. Both these recoveries together fall within category of commercial quantity so far as petitioner is concerned and the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that 550 grams recovered from petitioner is intermediate quantity, is of no consequence particularly in view of framing of charge for commission of offence under section 29 of NDPS Act. More so rigors of section 37 of NDPS Act are applicable in instant case and at this stage, this Court is not in a position to determine that accused is not guilty of commission of offence for which he has been charged and further that he will not indulge in similar type of offences if released on bail - Statutory requirements have not complied with by Investigating Officer, cannot be appreciated at this stage, particularly when prosecution is leading evidence before the trial court.
Result: Bail Application dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
RAJNESH OSWAL, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present bail application for grant of bail in a challan pending before the Court of Learned Sessions Judge Bandipora, arising out of FIR bearing No. 10/2018 of Police Station, Sumbal, Bandipora on the ground that the petitioner is innocent and statutory provisions of NDPS Act have not been complied with by the Investigating Officer during investigation.
2. It is further stated in the bail application that in some remand orders the petitioner is stated to have been arrested on 23.12.2017 whereas in another remand order, the date of arrest has been shown as 10.01.2018 and simultaneously, it is also pleaded that the section 29 of the NDPS Act has no application in the case of the petitioner. Further the petitioner has been in custody for the last more than three years irrespective of the fact that the petitioner is innocent and the petitioner is not remotely connected with commission of offence.
3. Response stands filed by the respondent in which besides stating the factual aspects of the case, it has been stated that the applicant/petitioner is involved in an illegal trade in an organized manner which is great threat to the society and the volume of the contraband recovered from the petitioner does not entitle the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in view of the strict bail provisions as contained in the NDPS Act.
4. Mr. Musavir Mir, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner is entitled to bail as the contraband allegedly recovered from the petitioner is only 550 grams and, as such, rigors of section 27 of the NDPS Act are not applicable. He further submits that there is no evidence against the petitioner/applicant that necessitates the framing of the charge under section 29 of the NDPS Act. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for the last more than three years and, as such, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has vehemently argued that the petitioner has been charged for commission of offences under sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act and as such, rigors of section 37 of the NDPS Act will apply in the instant case and the recovery made from the petitioner cannot be considered in isolation vis-a-vis recovery made from the other accused.
6. Heard and perused the record.
7. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the present application as projected by the respondent are that on 10.01.2018, Police Station, Sumbal received a written docket from SHO Police Station through SPO Imtiyaz Ahmad stating therein the SHO along with escort party Sgct Mohd. Rafiq, Ct. Sajad Hussain, SPO Qaiser Ahmad, SPO Imtiyaz Ahmad, SPO Khurshid Ahmad, SPO Nazir Ahmad were on patrolling duty and a naka was established at Shilvath main road near Ziyarat Baba Jungi. During naka checking, two persons carrying bags in their hands were coming from village Shilvath towards main road. The moment these two persons reached close to naka party, both of them moved back and tried to flee from spot. They were chased and apprehended along with their bags which they were carrying and on their search, charas like substance in the form of cakes was recovered from their possession and during questioning they disclosed their names as Tauqeer Ahmad Hajan S/o Shamus Ud Din and about 550 gms charas like substance in the form of 04 cakes was recovered from his possession and the another accused revealed his name as Jameel Ahmad Hajan S/o Mohd Ashraf Hajam and from his possession, 1 Kg 900 grams charas like substance was recovered in form of 10 cakes. On receipt of docket, FIR bearing No. 10/2018 for commission of offences under sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS Act was registered and after conclusion of the investigation, challan was present before the court of Principal Sessions Judge, Bandipora and charges for commission of offences under sections 8, 20 and 29 of the NDPS A
Point of Law - Dismiss the bail application - Recoveries together fall within category of commercial quantity - Section 37 of Act no accused can be released on bail when application is opposed by Pub....
The stringent conditions for granting bail to drug traffickers under Section 37 of the NDPS Act and the need to prevent their nefarious activities.
The conditions for granting bail under the NDPS Act are stringent, mandating that reasonable grounds for believing the accused's innocence and the absence of risk of reoffending must be demonstrated.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that bail under the NDPS Act can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty of the offence and not likely....
The main legal point established is the presumption of innocence, the avoidance of pre-trial punishment, and the need to balance individual liberty with the interest of society in the context of bail....
Bail under the NDPS Act necessitates proof of innocence and no risk of reoffending, reflecting the serious societal impact of drug-related crimes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the standard of 'reasonable grounds to believe' and the stringent parameters for the grant of bail under the NDPS Act, particula....
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.