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

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 13355

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
THE STATE OF KERALA – Appellant
Versus
LIBIN – Respondent
Crl.MC/2854/2021



Advocates:
ANITHA MATHAI, MUTHIRENTHY BASIL THOMAS, MIDHUN S. KARUN, ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, NIREESH MATHEW, SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE

Bail under the NDPS Act is strictly regulated for commercial quantity offenses, necessitating clear legal grounds for approval.

Headnote:

Bail - NDPS Act - Sections 20(b)(ii)(B), 20(b)(ii)(C), 60(3) - The court analyzed bail provisions under the NDPS Act, emphasizing that for offenses involving commercial quantities, bail is restricted unless legal conditions are met. The court set aside previous bail grant based on misapplication of law.

Fact of the Case:

Two accused were arrested for possession of substantial quantities of narcotics. The first accused was granted bail by the Sessions Court, citing lack of antecedents and conditions related to COVID-19. The state challenged this bail.

Issues: Whether the bail granted to the first accused was lawful under the NDPS Act, and whether the second accused was entitled to bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that bail for offenses involving commercial quantities under the NDPS Act requires strict compliance with Section 37, which was overlooked in the initial bail decision.

Final Decision: The bail granted to the first accused was set aside; the second accused's bail application was dismissed.

O R D E R

These two cases are connected and therefore, I am disposing these two cases by a common order.

2. I will first consider Crl.M.C. No.2854/2021 which is filed by the State to cancel the bail granted to the 1st accused as per Annexure-A order in Crime No.7/2021 of Excise Circle Office, North Paravur by the Sessions Court, Ernakulam. The offences alleged in Crime No. 7/2021 are under Secs.20(b)(ii)(B) (C) and 60(3) of the NDPS Act. The other bail application is filed by the 2nd accused in the same case.

3. The prosecution case is that the 1st accused along with the 2nd accused were travelling in a scooter and when the detecting officer intercepted, 6.696 kgs of Ganja and 1.250 kgs of Hashish oil were seized from the scooter. The 1st accused was the rider of the scooter and he is the RC owner of the vehicle also. The 2nd accused was the pillion rider. The accused were arrested on 10.02.2021 and they were in judicial custody. The 1st accused filed a bail application before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam and the bail application was considered by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Ernakulam. The 1st Addl.Sessions Judge granted bail to the petitioner with following observations.

“ 7. The petitioner is aged 29 years. He has no criminal antecedents. The alleged ganja is only intermediate quantity. It is submitted by the learned petitioner's counsel that his client was infected with Covid-19 twice while in jail. The learned counsel has produced annexure A1 bail order of the Hon'ble High Court in B.A. No. 3577/2021 dated 4.05.2021. In a similar case our Hon'ble High Court has granted bail to the accused in that case. Considering the pandemic situation and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner is granted bail.

In the result, the petition is allowed on the following conditions;

1. The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of this court.

2. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on every Saturdays between 4 pm to 6 pm for two months from the date of this order. 3. The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.

4. The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime of similar nature during the bail period."

4. Aggrieved by the same, this Crl.M.C. is filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

5. B.A. No. 8250/2021 is filed by the 2nd accused in Crime No.7/2021 of Excise Circle Office, North Paravur. The main contention of the 2nd accused is that the 1st accused is already released on bail and hence he also entitled the same benefit. It is also contended by the 2nd accused that no contraband is seized from the physical possession of the 2nd accused and the vehicle is owned by the 1st accused and the contraband articles were seized from the scooter, which belongs to the 1st accused. Therefore, there is nothing to connect the 2nd accused with the crime and therefore, this Court may grant bail to the petitioner. The counsel also submitted that the 2nd accused is in custody for about 10 months and the 1st accused was released on bail by the Sessions Court, Ernakulam on 31.5.2021 and he is free from that day onwards. It is the case of the petitioner that the main allegation is against the 1st accused and as far as the 2nd accused is concerned, the allegation is not that much serious.

6. Heard Sri.Grashious Kuriakose, the learned Addl.

Director General of Prosecutions for the State in Crl.M.C. No. 2854/2021 and Sri.Nireesh Mathew, learned counsel for the respondent in the Crl.M.C. I also heard Smt.Anitha Mathai Muthirenthy for the petitioner in B.A.No.8250/2021.

7. First I will consider the Crl.M.C. It is an admitted fact that, according to the prosecution, commercial quantity of Hashish Oil is seized at the time of detection by the detecting officer from the scooter. The 1st accused is the RC owner of the scooter. The contraband articles were seized from the seat cabin and f

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