The court emphasized that bail under the NDPS Act requires a high standard of proof of innocence not met by the applicant, leading to dismissal.

O R D E R

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.4 in Crime No.10/2021 of Vandiperiyar Excise Range Office, Idukki District. The offences alleged are punishable underSections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25, 22(b) and 29 of theNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985(for short, NDPS Act). 3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 26.02.2021, the Excise Officials conducted a search at the Kumali Check post based on the information received from the State Excise Enforcement Squad. During the search, accused Nos.1 to 3 were found transporting 20.970 kilograms of dried ganja and 1.100 kilograms of hashish oil in a car bearing registration No.KL-34-A-8388. It is further alleged that the applicant, along with accused Nos.1 to 3, conspired together and accused Nos.1 to 3 went to Andhra Pradesh using the car, procured the contraband and transported it to Kerala. It is also alleged that the applicant financed accused Nos. 1 to 3 to procure the contraband. Thus, the applicant is alleged to have committed the aforementioned offences. 4. I have heard Sri.P.Chandy Joseph, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.K.A.Noushad, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 07.12.2021. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. Since the quantity involved is commercial, the jurisdiction of this Court to grant bail is circumscribed by the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Bail can be granted in a case where there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such an offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

7. The investigation conducted so far reveals that the vehicle used for the transportation of the contraband was in the possession of the applicant. When accused Nos. 1 to 3 went to Andhra Pradesh to procure the contraband, the applicant was in Kerala. The investigation further reveals that during the said period, the applicant deposited money into his account, which was withdrawn by accused No.2 using the ATM card of the applicant. There are also other financial transactions between the accused. Moreover, there were frequent phone calls between the applicant and the remaining accused during this period. The applicant has criminal antecedents as well.

8. Having considered the submissions and after having gone through the materials on record, I am afraid that there are no substantial or probable causes for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the offences charged. The applicant has not been able to point out the existence of any such facts or circumstances as are sufficient to justify recording a finding that he is not guilty of the offences charged.

Considering the nature of the crime, the gravity of the offence, the complicity of the applicant in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage. The bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.

Sd/-