SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(Del) 31893

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
RAAZ ALI – Appellant
Versus
NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU – Respondent
BAIL APPLN.-292/2024



$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on: 10.07.2024 + BAIL APPLN. 292/2024 RAAZ ALI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Aditya Aggarwal, Mr. Manas Agarwal and Ms. Pooja Roy, Advs.

versus NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Utsav Singh and Mr. Rana Debnath, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

JUDGMENT

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the CrPC, 1973 read with Section 36A (3) of the NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No. VIII/65/DZU/2022 under Sections

8/22(c)/23(c)/29 of the NDPS Act registered at Narcotics Control Bureau.

2. Vide order dated 25.01.2024, notice was issued in the present bail application. The State has filed status report dated 28.02.2024, which forms part of the record.

3. The case of the prosecution as borne out from the status report is that on 23.08.2022, on the basis of secret information, NCB Delhi Zonal Unit has seized 14960 NRxZolpidem Tablets (commercial quantity) from a parcel having AWB No. N25175294 at DTDC Express Ltd., Samalkha, New Delhi.

BAIL APPLN. 292/2024 Page 1 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NARENDRA SINGH The parcel in question was booked by accused Mohd. Raaz Ali on the directions of accused Quazi Mohd. Zuhaib through accused Anil Kumar on the fake Ids of Vinod Mishra.

4. Upon enquiry from the courier company the whereabouts of the present petitioner/accused Mohd. Raaz Ali and Anil Kumar were revealed and they were intercepted in Lucknow on 24.08.2022. Further, accused Quazi Mohd. Zuhaib was also intercepted in Lucknow on 24.08.2022. All the three accused persons were put under arrest being involved in the present crime. It is also mentioned in the status report that copy of Aadhar Card and PAN Card of Vinod Mishra were found attached with the parcel, however on verification, same were found forged.

5. During investigation of the case, the present petitioner/accused Mohd. Raaz Ali disclosed that he had booked the parcel in question. He further disclosed that the parcel in question was sent to him by co-accused Quazi Mohd. Zuhaib. He also disclosed that he used to book the parcels through accused Anil Kumar on the fake id’s of Vinod Mishra.

6. The present petitioner further disclosed that other parcel which was booked by him through co-accused Anil Kumar from DTDC Courier Company is still lying in Delhi and the same would not have yet reached USA. On the basis of disclosure of the present petitioner Mohd. Raaz Ali & co-accused Quazi Mohd. Zuhaib, further recovery of 10800 NRx Tramadol tablets (commercial quantity) affected from a parcel having AWB No.

N25077634 at DTDC Express Ltd., Samalkha, New Delhi on 27.08.2022.

7. Mr. Aditya Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner at the outset submits that no contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. In such a scenario he submits that compliance with the BAIL APPLN. 292/2024 Page 2 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NARENDRA SINGH conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot be insisted on in the present case. To buttress his contention he submits that no link has been established by the investigating agency between the petitioner and the alleged contraband, in as much as, there is no monetary transaction reflecting involvement of the present petitioner.

8. He further submits that the present petitioner has been arrested merely on the basis of the disclosure statement and it is trite that a confessional statement is inadmissible in law in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Toofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu: (2021) 4 SCC 1

9. Considerable arguments have been made by the learned counsel on the aspect that there is a discrepancy in the weight of contraband recovered by the investigating agency and the discrepancy pointed out has been tabulated in the following chart:

ame of the Contraband Weight at the time of seizure Weight before the Ld. Magistrate at the time

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top