Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.
V. Packiakumar – Appellant
Versus
Central Rep. by The Intelligence Officer, Chennai – Respondent
Crl.O.P. No. 4515 of 2023
Decided On : 07-09-2023
NDPS Act - Bail - Section 8(c), 9(A), 21(c), 22(c), 23(c), 25(A), 28 and 29 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the definition of 'controlled substance' under Section 2(7)(b) of the NDPS Act, the power of the Central Government to regulate controlled substances under Section 9(a), and the punishment for contravention of orders made under Section 9A under Section 25A. The court emphasized the prohibition of manufacturing, distribution, sale, purchase, possession, storage, and consumption of controlled substances without a unique registration number in Form-A issued by the Zonal Director of Narcotics Control Bureau, as per Section 4 of the NDPS (Regulation of controlled substances) Order, 2013.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail in a case involving the illegal dealing of Alprazolam tablets and Pseudoephedrine. The petitioner was implicated based on confession statements of co-accused and was found to have assisted in the export of the consignment containing Pseudoephedrine.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's involvement in assisting the illegal export of controlled substances and the large quantity seized raised concerns about the potential use of the controlled substance in the manufacture of psychotropic substances, ultimately affecting humanity. Therefore, the court dismissed the bail petition.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the petitioner's involvement in the illegal export of controlled substances and the potential consequences of the large quantity seized.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly the definition of 'controlled substance,' the power of the Central Government to regulate controlled substances, and the prohibition of activities related to controlled substances without proper registration.
Final Decision: The criminal original petition seeking bail was dismissed by the court.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in CC.No.48 of 2017 pending trial on the file of the II Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under NDPS Act, Chennai.)
1. The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.03.2022 for the offence punishable under Section 8(c), 9(A), 21(c), 22(c), 23(c), 25(A), 28 and 29 of NDPS Act in CC.No.48 of 2017, pending trial on the file of the II Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under NDPS Act, Chennai, seeks bail.
2. The case of the complainant, relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition, in brief is as follows:
2.1 A specific information was received to the effect that some contraband items, covered under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act”), had been concealed inside a consignment intended for export and that another consignment concealed wtih Alprazolam Tablets, covered by NDPS Act, was arriving at Chennai through speed post and that the said consignment, intended for export, was filed in the name of M/s.M.M. Exporters, Old No.55/1, New No.133, Lingi Chetty Street, Mannady, Chennai 600 001 under Shipping Bill [SB] No.2418014 dated 24.11.2016 in container No.GESU5984926.
2.2 In pursuance of the information, the officers of the respondent conducted a search at the godown premises, namely M/s.Udayam Export of one Syed Musafar Sadiq (A1), situated at No.105, New Street, S.P.Koil Street, Mannady, Chennai 600 001 on 25.11.2016. The officials found the cotton boxes meant for Export to Malaysia. They cut opened and examined some cotton boxes and then found to contain sarees, chudidars and cosmetic items, etc. They detained them along with Indian currency of Rs.27,24,800/- under Mahazar dated 25/26.11.2016. Further, the officials seized 9990 Alprazolam tablets on 26.11.2016 from a speed post article No.EU667761597IN at National Sorting Hub, Chennai at St.Thomas Mount, Head Post Office Complex, Chennai 600 016 under Mahazar dated 26.11.2016. This parcel was found to have been booked by one Tariq Ali Khan. The necessary samples were taken from the tablets seized.
2.3 On 28.11.2016, the officers conducted examination of container No.GESU5984926 of M/s.Triway CFS at No.149, Idayanchavadi, New Nappalayam Ponneri High Road, Chennai 600 103. The examination pertains to shipping bill No.2418014 dated 24.11.2016. The consignor was M/s.M.M. Exporters and the consignor was M/s.A.R.Bright Trading and Resources, at No.9, JLN Kota Laksamana, 1/7, TMN Kota Laksmana Seksyen 175 200 Melaka, Malaysia. This consignment found to have contained Pseudoephedrine valued at a sum of Rs.4,78,00,000/- in international market. It is a controlled substance covered under NDPS Act. This controlled substance was found to be rolled in rectangular shaped cardboard in specially made cavity with fabrics. Totally, there were 48 numbers of polythene covers containing white powdery substance. On testing the same with a field test kit, it answered for Pseudoephedrine and necessary samples were taken. The voluntary statement of accused were recorded under section 67 of NDPS Act.
2.4 The investigation revealed that the accused 1 and 2, namely Syed Musafar Sadiq and Sirajudeen, are involved in the trade of exporting fabrics to Malaysia. They also used to conceal and smuggle out the narcotic drugs along with fabrics. Those narcotic drugs are supplied by accused 5 and 6, namely Abu and Usman, for monetary consideration. A1 admitted that he was organizing the concealment and packing of 23.900 kgs of Pseudo Ephedrine for export using IEC number of M/s.M.M. Exporters. It is also admitted by him that 9990 Alprazolam tablets were sourced by fifth accused/Abu and the said parcel was to be collected by him for concealment and smuggling out in subsequent export co
The prohibition of activities related to controlled substances without proper registration and the potential consequences of large quantities of controlled substances being illegally exported were ce....
The bar under Section 37 NDPS Act does not apply to cases involving controlled substances, allowing for bail if the accused demonstrates entitlement, especially for foreign nationals.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the controlled commodity nature of Pseudoephedrine and the absence of criminal antecedents in granting bail.
NDPS Act – Controlled substance – Grant of Bail - in cases, where the controlled substance recovered was even much larger then that recovered from the petitioner/accused even in those cases the bail ....
The stringent bail conditions under the NDPS Act and the need for substantial probable causes to grant bail.
The court held that the provisions of the NDPS Act apply alongside the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, and bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act requires clear grounds for believing the accused is not guilt....
The main legal point established is the requirement of 'reasonable grounds' under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for granting bail, emphasizing the gravity of the offence and the accused's involvement.
The accused must satisfy the twin conditions under Entry 35 of the Notification and produce necessary evidence of engagement in therapeutic practice for medical or scientific purposes to overcome the....
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
