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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 13766

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
S.R. Krishna Kumar, J
ABRAR SHEIKH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE BY PSI, CEN CRIME POLICE STATION, UDUPI DISTRICT – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4097 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT. HALEEMA AMEEN
For the Respondents: SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA

Bail cannot be denied merely due to past offences if no contraband is linked to the petitioner and if cooperation with investigation is shown.

Headnote:(A) NDPS Act, 1985 - Section 22(b) - Petitioner seeking bail - Credible information received regarding sale of contraband - Contraband not seized from the petitioner - Petitioner not the owner or driver of the vehicle - Quantity involved deemed small - Conditions imposed for bail granted. (Paras 2, 6, 7)

(B) Bail - Considerations - Contraband not in possession - Willingness to cooperate with investigation - History of habitual offences by petitioner considered but not overwhelming enough to deny bail. (Paras 4, 5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was apprehended alongside others for allegedly selling ganja and MDMA valued at approximately Rs.11,28,000, but no contraband was seized from him.

Findings of Court:
Bail is granted subject to conditions including a personal bond and regular appearances in court.

Issues: The main questions include whether the contraband was in the possession of the petitioner and the implications of his history of habitual offences.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that, in absence of seizure and considering the small quantity, bail should not be denied unduly; cooperation with the investigation is acknowledged positively.

Result: Petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. facts regarding the circumstances of the petitioner’s arrest and the alleged offense. (Para 2)
2. arguments related to the petitioner’s past offenses and the prosecution's stance. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court’s observations on the merits of bail considering the absence of contraband. (Para 6)

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner – accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Crime No.13/2025 registered by the respondent – Police for an offence punishable under Section 22(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985 .

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl.SPP for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that the respondent -

police received a credible information on 12.01.2025 that the petitioner – accused No.1 and six others were selling ganja and MDMA weighing about 16 gms having an approximate value of Rs.11,28,000/- near Baindoor Taluk, Udupi and were using a car bearing No.KA-20 MD-7053 for committing the alleged offence. They were apprehended by the police and registered the aforesaid FIR in Crime No.3/2025 against them for alleged offences punishable under Section 22(b) of NDPS Act, 1985 .

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the contraband was not seized or recovered from the petitioner and quantity of the same being small, the petitioner may be granted the relief of bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready to co- operate with the investigation and would undertake to abide by the conditions that may be imposed upon him.

5. Per contra, learned Addl.SPP submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he is involved in Eight other cases including two NDPS cases and as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

6. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that prima facie, the contraband was neither seized nor recovered from the possession or custody of the petitioner – accused No.1, who is also not neither the driver nor owner of the aforesaid vehicle. So also, the quantity involved in the present case is small and the petitioner who undertakes to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court, he is entitled to be released on bail subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the Petition is allowed. The petitioner-

accused No.1 is ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:

(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) and shall furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

(ii) Petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.

(iii) Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly and as and when required.

(iv) Petitioner shall mark his attendance before the SHO of the concerned Police Station between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., once in every two weeks for a period of three months.

(v) Petitioner shall not repeat the offences alleged against him in the present petition as well as any other offences including the offences alleged against him in the other proceedings against him. (vi) Petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Trial Court.

If any of these conditions are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to move the matter for cancellation of bail.

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top