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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 55438

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
NIYAS N – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./3109/2022



Advocates:
V.JOHN MANI, JACKSON JOHNY VARGHESE, SABU SETHULAKSHMI, K.K.DIANA LAURANCE PAUL, M.KIRANLAL, SAMEER M NAIR, GEETHU KRISHNAN, HARSHA SUSAN SAM, MANU RAMACHANDRAN, T.S.SARATH, R.RAJESH (VARKALA), SABIKH MOHAMMED, V.S, V.M.VISHNU MOHAN

The burden of proving lack of conscious possession in narcotics cases lies with the accused, and bail is restricted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act when commercial quantities are involved.

Headnote:

Bail - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 22, 29 - The Court emphasized the burden on accused to prove lack of conscious possession of contraband and the implications of Section 37 compliance for bail eligibility.

Fact of the Case:

Three accused filed bail applications after being arrested for possession of MDMA and ganja. They claimed the substances were neither in their physical possession nor connected to them, and previous bail rulings favored others with similar circumstances.

Finding of the Court:

The Court noted that significant quantities of contraband were found in premises linked to the accused, and their prior criminal records indicated a pattern of involvement in drug-related crimes. The prosecution's opposition and lack of significant evidence supporting the accused's claims were critical.

Issues: Whether the accused are eligible for bail given the quantities of narcotics involved and the conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court maintained that mere absence of contraband in physical possession does not absolve individuals from liability, emphasizing that compliance with Section 37 of the NDPS Act is mandatory for bail; this imposes a heavier burden on the accused.

Final Decision: All bail applications are dismissed.

ORDER

These are applications for regular bail.

2. B.A.No. 3790 of 2022 is filed by the 1st accused whereas B.A.No.3778 of 2022 is filed by the 2nd accused and B.A.No.3109 of 2022 is filed by the 3rd accused in Crime No.1790 of 2021 Chirayinkeezhu Police Station registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 22 (b)(ii)(B), 22(c) & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, “NDPS Act”).

3. Prosecution allegation is that on 24.09.2021 at about 16.50 hours, the accused persons were found in possession of 63.60 grams of MDMA kept in the residence of 1st accused and 2.100kgs of ganja kept in the Maruti Alto car bearing Registration No. KL-16-L-2419 parked in front of the house.

B.A.Nos.3790 & 3778 of 2022

4. The case of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 is that the house from which the alleged psychotropic substance and the narcotic drug were seized does not belong to them. The said house, though taken on rent was not occupied by the 1st accused for the reason that his wife was admitted in hospital for delivery. The petitioners have no knowledge about the things which were alleged to have been seized from the said house. The detecting officer has prepared the documents without any bonafides and without any scientific proof held that the alleged substance was MDMA. No detection kit was used to identify the suspected substance. It is submitted that detention/arrest of a person cannot be made solely relying on the assumptions of the police officer that too in a case of such serious nature. So far forensic laboratory report has not reached the Court which would attract the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Petitioners were arrested on 24.09.2021 and are under detention since then. Further incarceration of the petitioners is not necessary. Even though the petitioners had preferred applications for regular bail before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram, the said applications were dismissed. Charge sheet is already laid on 12.02.2022.

B.A. No.3109 of 2022

5. The case of the petitioner/3rd accused is that he is innocent of the above allegations. The petitioner is not having any knowledge about the alleged offences against him. It is alleged by the prosecution that the contraband was seized from the house rented by the 1st accused and the alleged car involved in the above offence is owned by one Ms.Kavitha Rajan. The petitioner is no connection with the above alleged offences. The MDMA and ganja was seized from the possession of 1st accused. It is also submitted that the 1st accused is having animosity with the petitioner and on the alleged date of incident, the 2nd accused who is having acquaintance with the petitioner asked him to settle the dispute between the petitioner and 1st accused and requested him to accompany him. Meanwhile the 2nd respondent came to the alleged place and arrested the petitioner along with the other accused alleging that 1st accused is found in possession of MDMA and ganja. It is submitted that the petitioner had no knowledge about the alleged possession of MDMA by the accused. The 1st accused who is in inimical terms with the petitioner, implicated the petitioner in the above crime. It is submitted that there is absolutely nothing to connect the petitioner herein with the recovery made from the other accused. The petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

6. The main contention raised by the petitioners is that no contraband was seized from their possession and therefore they are entitled for bail. They further contend that the 4th accused was granted bail by this Court and further that Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram has granted bail to accused Nos.5 and 6.

7. Learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the application for bail mainly contending that on getting reliable information that narcotic drugs are being kept for sale in a house by the name “Thoufiq Manzil”

and the said house was se

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