HIGH COURT OF KERALA
C.S. DIAS, J
SHIYAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl. 1791/2024
NDPS Act - Bail Application - The court allowed the bail application of the accused under the NDPS Act, considering the intermediate quantity of contraband, the accused's judicial custody, and the recovery made. The court imposed specific conditions for the bail.
Fact of the Case:
The first accused was found in possession of MDMA and filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused's further detention was unnecessary and granted bail, imposing specific conditions.
Issues: Bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for offences under the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The accused's release on bail was justified based on the intermediate quantity of contraband, the accused's judicial custody, and the recovery made.
Final Decision: The court allowed the bail application and directed the accused to be released on bail, subject to specific conditions.
The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the first accused in Crime No.146/2024 of the Kolathur Police Station, Malappuram, registered against the accused (three in number) for allegedly committing the offences under Sections 22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘NDPS Act’). The petitioner was arrested on 01.02.2024.
2. The crux of the prosecution case is that; on 01.02.2024, at around 14.45 hours, the first accused was found in possession of 2.98 grams, the second accused was found in possession of 0.23 gram and the third accused was found in possession of 0.05 gram of MDMA, i.e., a total of 3.26 grams of MDMA. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.
3. Heard Sri. Sidharth.O, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Shynimol. V.O, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 01.02.2024. The investigation in the case is practically complete, and recovery has been effected. Even assuming the allegations in the First Information Report are correct, the contraband is of an intermediate quantity. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The petitioner is willing to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that the contraband that was allegedly seized from the petitioner is of an intermediate quantity. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The investigation in the case is in progress.
6. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the materials placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, especially taking note of the fact that the contraband article that was allegedly seized from the petitioner is of an intermediate quantity, that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 01.02.2024, and that the recovery has been effected, I am of the view that the petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.
In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.