IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 15TH SRAVANA, 1946 BAIL APPL. NO. 6221 OF 2024 CRIME NO.514/2024 OF Thrikkakara Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CRMC NO.2040 OF 2024 OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/S:

RISHAD AGED 40 YEARS , S/O MUHAMMAD SHAREEF, RAZRISH VILLA, ELLATHU NAGAR, PALLURUTHY P.O ERNAKULAM ., PIN - 682006 BY ADV PADMA LAKSHMI RESPONDENT/S:

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT:

SR PP SMT SEETHA S THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

C.S.DIAS,J --------------------------------------------

Bail Application No.6221 of 2024 ---------------------------------------------

Dated this the 6th day of August, 2024

ORDER

The application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the 3^rd accused in Crime No.514/2024 of the Thrikkakara Police Station, Ernakulam, which is registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Section 22(c) r/w Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘the Act’). The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.05.2024.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that: on

10.05.2024, at around 16:55 hours, seven accused persons including a lady were found in an apartment at Thrikkakara, Ernakulam and were found in possession of 48.59 grams of MDMA. The accused were arrested on the spot with the contraband article. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

3. Heard; Smt.Padma Lakshmi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha S., the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no material to substantiate that the petitioner has committed the above offences. The petitioner has reliably learnt that as per the chemical analysis report the contraband is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is of an intermediate quantitiy. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on statutory bail as contemplated under Section 36A of the Act read with Section 167(2) of the Code. Hence, the application may be allowed.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submits that the investigation is in progress. She also stated that the petitioner has committed a similar offence. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of him committing a similar offence. Hence, the application may be dismissed. Nonetheless, she did not dispute the fact that the contraband has turned out to be 'methamphetamine' and therefore is of an intermediate quantity. The investigation in the case is not complete and the final report has not been laid.

6. The prosecution was launched against the accused on the allegation that they were found in conscious possession of 48.59 grams of MDMA. Now, as per the chemical analysis report, the contraband has turned out to be 'methamphetamine'. Therefore, the contraband involved in the case is of an intermediate quantity. Indisputably, the petitioner was arrested on 10.05.2024, which is now nearly 90 days. The investigation in the case is not complete and the final report has not been laid. Therefore, in view of Section 167(2) of the Code r/w Section 36(A) of the Act, the petitioner is entitled to be released on statutory bail.

7. It is apposite to extract Section 36A(4) of the Act, which reads as follows:

“ (4) In respect of persons accused of an offence punishable under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A or for offences involving commercial quantity the references in sub-section (2) of section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) thereof to “ninety days