ORDER :

1. Heard Smt. G. Sangeetha, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who is representing the Respondent.

2. Contending that he is entitled for bail, the petitioner, who is arrayed as Accused No.1 in Crime No.202 of 2022 of Huzurnagar Police Station, is before this Court.

3. Making her submission, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has not committed any offence whatsoever and further, the petitioner hails from a poor family and there is no previous crime history against the petitioner and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel also states that the petitioner was arrested on 17.07.2022 and remanded to judicial custody and thus, he is in judicial custody since more than 125 days and therefore, he is entitled for bail.

4. Vehemently opposing the submission thus made, learned Additional Public Prosecutor stated that huge quantity of 200 Kgs of Ganja was seized from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also stated that hatching a plan, the petitioner committed the offence and he used his close relatives i.e. accused Nos.2 & 3 to escape from police while travelling. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted that the case is hit by Section 37 of NDPS Act.

5. The version of the prosecuting agency is that Accused No.4 was doing business in transporting and selling Ganja. The petitioner got associated with Accused No.4. Thereafter, they both were involved in selling Ganja. Subsequently, Accused No.4 informed the petitioner to bring two women in his vehicle to avoid police checking while transporting Ganja. On that, the petitioner approached Accused Nos.2 & 3, who are his close relatives and asked them to accompany him. He offered to pay Rs.5,000/- each. They accepted the proposal due to financial problems. On 14.07.2022, the petitioner and Accused No.4 left in their TOYOTA INNOVA vehicle and went to Aurangabad, took accused Nos.2 & 3 and after that, they went to Rajahmundry of Andhra Pradesh State. Accused No.4 dropped the petitioner and Accused Nos.2 & 3 at a Tiffin Centre in Rajahmundry and went somewhere and brought load of Ganja. Later, the petitioner and Accused Nos.2 & 3 boarded the vehicle and started proceeding. They informed Accused Nos.2 & 3 to state to police if the vehicle is stopped that accused No.2 is suffering from ill-health and therefore, she is being shifted to hospital for treatment. On 17.07.2022, when they reached Telangana-Andhra Pradesh boarder check-post, the vehicle was stopped. However, Accused No.4, who was driving the vehicle, drove the same at a high speed with an intention to escape. But, they were stopped. Accused No.4 got down from the vehicle and fled away by leaving the vehicle. Police checked the vehicle and found 8 bags of Ganja weighing 200 Kgs in total.

6. Admittedly, the Ganja seized as per the version of the prosecution exceeds commercial quantity. Such being the situation, as per Section 37(2) of NDPS Act, apart from other conditions laid down under the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 37 of the NDPS Act should also be taken into consideration.

7. The legal position with regard to grant of bail in NDPS cases is discussed by the Hon’ble Apex Court and by various High Courts across the country in number of decisions.

8. In this case, the grounds urged are that Accused Nos.2 & 3 were granted bail on this day, that the petitioner is in judicial custody since more than 125 days, that the confessional statement is invalid in the eye of law.

9. To decide all these factors, the view expressed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on each of the points requires to be borne in mind.

10. When grant of bail was questioned by the Customs Authorities, where it purportedly recovered huge quantity of Diazepam 5mg tablets from the accused, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case between Customs, New Delhi Vs. Ahmadalieva Nodira, (2004) 3 SCC 549, discussing the limitations for granting