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) 57694

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
ABDUL SALAM ABDUL MOHSEN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 14470 OF 2025 | CRIME NO.152/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.PREEJA V.P., SRI.V.P.PRASANTH
For the Respondents: SMT. M.K.PUSHPALATHA, SR.PP

The court can grant bail if the rigour of Section 37 does not apply due to the nature and quantity of contraband, alongside other considerations.

Headnote:This bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for the petitioner who is the 3rd accused in Crime No.152/2025, where the prosecution alleges possession of 5.683 grams of MDMA. The petitioner has been in custody since arrest on 04.11.2025, and it is contended that he should be released on bail due to the duration of custody and lack of necessity for further detention. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail citing the nature of the offence. The court finds that Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not apply due to the quantity involved, allowing bail under prescribed conditions. The bail application is allowed contingent on the petitioner executing a bond and complying with specific directions.

Result: Bail application is allowed.

Table of Content
1. bail application filed under bnss regarding accused's possession of mdma. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented for and against the bail application. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's analysis regarding the applicability of the ndps act. (Para 7)
4. imposition of conditions for the granting of bail. (Para 8)

ORDER

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

2. Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.152/2025 of Excise Range Office, Muvattupuzha, Ernakulam; registered for the offences punishable under Sections 22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [for short, ‘NDPS Act’].

3. The prosecution case is that, on 04.11.2025, the accused was found in possession of 5.683 grams of MDMA and thereby committed the offences alleged. Petitioner was arrested on 04.11.2025 and he has been in custody since then.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and that since petitioner has been in custody from

04.11.2025, he ought to be released on bail.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner ought not to be released on bail.

7. Since the nature of contraband seized is found to be MDMA and the quantity of 5.683 grams falls under the category of intermediate quantity, the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not apply. As the petitioner has been in custody from 04.11.2025 and as there is no possibility of an immediate trial, I am of the view that his further detention is not necessary. Therefore, petitioner ought to be released on bail.

8. In the result, this bail application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses;

nor shall he tamper with the evidence.

(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.

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