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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52053

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
KRISHNAPRIYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Application No. 13298 of 2025 | Crime No. 828/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.S.RAJEEV, SRI.V.VINAY, SRI.M.S.ANEER, SHRI.SARATH K.P., SHRI.ANILKUMAR C.R., SHRI.K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN, SMT.DIPA V., SHRI.AZAD SUNIL, SHRI.AKASH CHERIAN THOMAS
For the Respondents: SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA, SR.PP

Possession of intermediate quantity of narcotics allows for bail under specified conditions despite prior refusals.

Headnote:This bail application arises under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner, accused No. 2 in Crime No.828/2025, was arrested for possessing 37.3 grams of MDMA. The court found the restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act inapplicable due to possession being under intermediate quantity. The primary questions framed involve the eligibility for bail, with the court concluding that the petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to certain conditions.

Table of Content
1. bail application procedure under new law. (Para 1 , 2)
2. nature of the charges and current status. (Para 3 , 4)
3. arguments regarding bail eligibility. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. prosecution opposition and court's consideration. (Para 8 , 9)
5. final ruling on bail conditions. (Para 10)

O R D E R

This is an application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘ BNSS ’).

2. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.828/2025 of Peechi Police Station, Thrissur. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 22 (c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985.

3. The prosecution case originally was that on 31.08.2025 at about 08.51 a.m, the petitioner along with the other accused was found in possession of 37.3 grams of MDMA at Vaniampara

4. The petitioner was arrested on 31.08.2025 and she has been in judicial custody since then.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FSL report has confirmed that the petitioner and the other accused were in possession of 37.3 grams of methamphetamine. Petitioner No.1 had earlier filed B.A. No.13009 of 2025 before this Court, and the said application was dismissed on the ground that the bail plea was hit by Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as the contraband seized falls under the intermediate quantity, the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS act is not applicable.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea of the petitioner.

9. The learned Public Prosecutor produced the FSL examination report showing that the substance recovered was methamphetamine. Admittedly, the petitioner and the other accused were in possession of the intermediate quantity of the substance. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last

80 days.

10. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the tenure of judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail on conditions.

In the result, the Bail Application is allowed as follows: (a) The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her executing bond for Rs.1,00,000/ (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.

(b) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 A.M. and 11 A.M. till the final report is filed.

(c) The petitioner shall surrender her passport before the jurisdictional court. If she has no passport, the petitioner shall file an affidavit to that effect.

(d) The petitioner shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the jurisdictional court.

(e) The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

(f) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or attempt to tamper with the evidence.

(g) If any of the bail conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court will be at liberty to cancel the bail, in accordance with law.

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