Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
VIDHU KRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./7328/2022
Bail - Narcotic Drugs - NDPS Act Section List - The court addressed bail application concerning a narcotics offense, emphasizing the provisions of the NDPS Act regarding commercial quantities and the stringent criteria for granting bail, which ultimately influenced the court's decision to deny bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an accused in a narcotics case, was arrested after police seized significant amounts of MDMA during a raid at a hotel. He claims false implication and argues he was merely present due to friendship with another accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the substantial quantity of MDMA involved, the ongoing investigation, and evidence from CCTV and communication records indicating the petitioner's involvement, leading to a decision against granting bail.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering the serious nature of the allegations, the quantity of drugs involved, and the stage of the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the high quantity of narcotics and the initial phase of the investigation warranted the application of strict provisions of the NDPS Act, thus justifying the denial of bail.
Final Decision: The bail application is dismissed.
ORDER
This is an application for regular bail.
2. Petitioner is the 5th accused in Crime No.864 of 2022 of Pandalam Police Station, Pathanamthitta registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 20 (c), 60, 8, 29 of NDPS Act.
3. The allegation is that, on 30.07.2022 at 3.55 p.m., Police Inspector, Pandalam police station and his party seized 4.480 grams of MDMA from the possession of the 1st accused and 151.490 grams of MDMA from the from the possession of the 4th accused, and thereby a total quantity of 155.970 grams was seized when they were sitting in the Room No. 106 of River Walk Hotel, Pandalam. It is also alleged that during search the police seized Electronic weighing machine, plastic covers and also recovered two cars and one scooter parked nearby the hotel. The allegation raised against the petitioner is that he is also present in the hotel room along with accused Nos.1 to 4 while search and seizure was conducted.
4. Petitioner submits that he was arrested on
31.07.2022 and is in custody since then and he has been falsely implicated in the above said crime and he is never in possession of any narcotic drugs. Petitioner is the registered owner of the car bearing Reg. No.KL 83 6479 and accused No.1 and the petitioners are friends and that is the only reason why he has been arrayed as an accused.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the application for bail mainly contending that 155.970 grams of MDMA was seized from the possession of the petitioner and the other accused. Learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the investigation is only in the initial stage and the CCTV visuals revealed the presence of the petitioner. On verification of CDR details and tower location, revealed that the petitioner had constant contact with the other accused.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations, and that the investigation is at the initial stage and the contraband involved is 155.970 grams of MDMA which is admittedly a commercial quantity whereby the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will come into play, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed.
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
