IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
(Through virtual mode)
Abdul Majid – Appellant
Versus
Union Territory of J&K and Anr. – Respondents
Bail App No.59/2021 and CrlM Nos.382/2021
Decided on : 17-05-2021
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 439-Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985-Section 37-Bail application-During course of investigation and in its quest to find out source from where contraband item had been transported, police made further investigation in the matter-Petitioner has avoided his arrest for some time taking benefit of security scenario in Kashmir valley-Trial Court has taken note of all these aspects and has rightly come to conclusion that petitioner had not been able to make out a case where Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail-Contraband item recovered represents commercial quantity, therefore, while considering bail application, Court has to keep in mind rigors engrafted in Section 37 of NDPS Act. (Paras 9, 10 and 11)
Result-Application dismissed.
Judgment
1. The petitioner is one of the accused in FIR No.90/2019, which, after investigation, is pending trial before the Court Sessions Judge, Ramban [“the Trial Court”]. On the plea that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and was also not arraigned as an accused in the challan bearing No.178/2019, which was initially presented before the Trial Court, the petitioner moved a bail application before the Trial Court seeking his release from the judicial custody.
2. The application for bail filed by the petitioner was contested by the prosecution and the same was dismissed by the Trial Court vide its order dated 15.01.2021. As is apparent from order dated 15.01.2021 passed by the Trial Court, the petitioner was not held entitled to release on bail in view of his involvement in the commission of offence under Sections 8/20/29 of NDPS Act involving recovery of commercial quantity of charas weighing 10 kg and 50 gms. Aggrieved, the petitioner has moved this Court for his release on bail in the aforesaid FIR/challan on the ground that there is no evidence on record, which could connect the petitioner with the commission of offence, alleged in the FIR/challan. It is also contended that the basis of involvement of the petitioner in the commission of offence is a confessional statement made by the co-accused-Mod. Qasim, from whose possession the contraband was recovered, which is not admissible in evidence.
3. Before I advert to the grounds on which the petitioner seeks concession of bail, it is necessary to allude to the prosecution version.
As per the prosecution, on 28.04.2019, ASI Mohd. Rashid along with Constables Riaz Ahmed, Mushtaq Ahmed and SPOs Hoshiar Singh, Mohd. Akram, Om Parkash and Avtar Singh were performing naka duty near Shaan Palace, Ramban. During checking of the vehicles at the naka at about 6.40 pm, a santro car bearing registration No.DL4CND-7336, which was on its way from Srinagar towards Jammu was stopped. The car was being driven by co-accused Mohd. Qasim R/o Mumbai, Maharashtra. While checking the said vehicle, a plastic bag containing 101 balls of charas like substance weighing approximately 10-12 kilogram was recovered from the vehicle. The contraband was concealed under the front seat of the vehicle. Accordingly, the police at the naka point swung into action and forwarded a docket to the police station and FIR No.90/2019 under Sections 8/20/29 NDPS Act was registered at Police Station, Ramban and the investigation taken up by Inspector Vijay Kotwal, the then SHO, Police Station, Ramban.
4. Accused-Mohd. Qasim was arrested, the requisite legal formalities were completed, the contraband was seized, statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C recorded and the sealed samples were prepared and sent for forensic/chemical analysis. The seized item was found to be charas. During further course of investigation, it came to light that co-accused- Mohd. Qasim resident of Mumbi (Maharasthra) had received one vehicle Santro car from an unknown friend of the petitioner-Abdul Majid R/o Aishmquam, Pahalgm District Anantnag on his recommendation. He brought it to Aishmquam to the residence of the petitioner-Abdul Majid to pick up 24 kg of charas, which was handed over to him by petitioner-Abdul Majid, packed in three bags. Co-accused- Mohd. Qasim concealed one bag under front seat of the car and remaining two bags in right and left boot of the car. It was further revealed that the contraband was being carried as per the instructions of the petitioner-Abdul Majid. He was transporting the aforesaid contraband to Delhi to deliver to one unknown customer, who was to make contact with the co-accused-Mohd. Qasim at Delhi and collect the contraband from him. From the investigation, it was found that the petitioner-Abdul Majid was the kingpin and was indulging in sale of charas in the area to unknown truck drivers and youths and other smugglers throughout India. On the basis of this material, offence under Sections 8/20/29 NDPS Act
The admissibility of evidence, including confessional statements, and the application of Section 37 of the NDPS Act for bail, were central legal points established in the judgment.
Narcotic Intoxicate - Charas - Bail Dismissed - Under Section 37 of Act no accused can be released on bail when application is opposed by Public Prosecutor unless court is satisfied that there are re....
The presumption of conscious possession applies in drug cases, necessitating the petitioner to disprove involvement in the crime to grant bail under the NDPS Act.
Point of Law : Court has to keep in mind nature of accusations, nature of evidence in support thereof, severity of the punishment, which conviction will entail, character of the accused, circumstance....
The court established that for charges under the NDPS Act, corroborative evidence is essential to substantiate claims of abetment or conspiracy.
The need for substantial probable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and the deleterious impact of narcotic drugs on society.
Object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused in the trial and the proper test to be applied in the solution of the question whether bail should be granted or refused is whether it is....
A confessional statement made by a co-accused under section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be the sole basis for denying bail to a person from whose conscious possession there was no recovery.
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.