The stringent provisions of section 37 of the NDPS Act apply, limiting bail eligibility, especially in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics.

ORDER

This is an application for regular bail filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 .

2. Petitioner is the accused in O.R No.3 of 2025 of Narcotics Control Bureau, Cochin Zonal Unit. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under section 8(c) read with sections 22(c), 23(c), 28 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act').

3. According to the prosecution, pursuant to an information received on

04-03-2025 from the Kochi International Mail Centre, that a suspicious parcel is lying at their office, the officers of the Narcotics Control Bureau (for short 'NCB') reached the said Centre and inspected the parcel. The inspection revealed that the parcel which was sent from Leeuwarden, Netherlands, was addressed to Sri. Sachin Dev with the address as 'OXYGEN, Student Paradise (below hdfc), Thriprayar Trade Center, Poly Junction, Thriprayar, Thrissur, Kerala, Pin 680567 INDIA' and it contained 0.14 gms of LSD. Prosecution alleges that the parcel was meant for the petitioner and a fake name was deliberately mentioned in the parcel to escape from being detected. Petitioner was arrested on 07-03-2025 and has been in custody since then.

4. Sri. Shabu Sreedharan, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the allegations against the petitioner are totally false and there are no materials to connect him with the alleged crime. The learned Counsel urged that having regard to the long period of detention already undergone by the petitioner, he ought to be released on bail. It was further submitted that petitioner had not even been found to be in posession of any contraband and therefore the continued detention is unwarranted. The learned Counsel also submitted that there are no materials to legally connect the petitioner with the crime and hence the proceedings initiated on the basis of assumptions and surmises cannot justify such long periods of detention.

5. Sri. R.Vinu Raj, the learned Special Public Prosecutor after referring to the objections filed by the respondent contended that petitioner had adopted a dubious method of providing a wrong name for drugs purchased from outside the country in order to mislead and evade the legal process. It was submitted that on receiving information from the International Postal Centre, about the suspicious parcel, the NCB officials after seizing the contraband, sent a dummy parcel in the same address for the purpose of identifying the person who accepts it. The dummy parcel was dispatched to the end destination and on 07-03-2025, the dummy parcel reached the address which was a shop by name ‘Oxygen’. The postman after entering the shop enquired about the person mentioned in the address (Sri. Sachin Dev) and informed that a parcel had come from Netherlands. Petitioner stood up and introduced himself as Sri. Sachin Dev and enquired with the postman, whether it was a parcel from Netherlands, from where he was expecting one. Thereafter, the NCB officials enquired with the petitioner, who admitted that it was a friend by name Praveen Prabhakaran who had booked the parcel of drugs in the false name of Sri. Sachin Dev but intended for the petitioner. According to the learner Prosecutor, there were prior such instances also and WhatsApp details were also shown to the officers about the parcel booked earlier as well as other details. The learned Prosecutor asserted that investigation is only at the initial stages and it has been revealed that petitioner is only one of the links in the chain of drug traffickers and more persons are involved in the crime of importing drugs from outside .

6. I have considered the rival contentions.

7. The quantity of contraband se