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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12493

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
AJU ANTONY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 1582 OF 2026 | SC NO.16 OF 2022



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.SHAJ, SMT.BEENA N.KARTHA, SRI.ARUN CHAND, SHRI.BHARAT VIJAY P., SHRI.KEVIN JAMES, SHRI.AKASH JOSHI, SMT.MINU VITTORRIA PAULSON, SMT.GOPIKA GOPAL, SMT.ARCHANA P.P., SHRI.REN SHIBU, SMT.SHEHROON PATEL A.K., SHRI.ISSAC MELVIN B.O., SMT.RIYA PHILO JOHNSON, SHRI.SAJIE SHANKAR, SMT.GISHMA P. S., SMT.MARY HELEN A. G.
For the Respondents: SMT.SEETHA S.

The court permits the accused to surrender and file bail applications, ensuring they are considered on the same day.

Headnote:The petitioner, the accused in S.C. No.16/2022, seeks to surrender and obtain bail for alleged offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The Court allows the petitioner to surrender and directs the Trial Court to consider bail applications on merits. The Court expresses no opinion on Section 37's applicability.

Table of Content
1. accused allowed to surrender and file for bail. (Para 1 , 2)
2. trial court directed to assess bail applications on merits. (Para 3 , 4)

Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2026 ORDER The petitioner is the accused in S.C. No.16/2022 on the file of the Special Court (NDPS Act Cases) Thodupuzha (Trial Court), which has originated from Crime No.1401/2021 registered by the Thrikkodithanam Police Station, Kottayam, alleging the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 20 (b)(ii) B and 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 .

2. The petitioner has stated in the Criminal Miscellaneous Case that he is totally ignorant about the above crime. It is learnt that the petitioner was subsequently implicated as an accused in the case. The petitioner had gone abroad for the purpose of his employment. It is only recently that the petitioner learnt that he has been made an accused and a non-bailable warrant has been issued against him. The petitioner is willing to surrender before the Trial Court and get himself enlarged on bail. However, the petitioner is apprehensive that his applications may not be considered on the date of surrender and he may be remanded to judicial custody. Hence, the Crl.M.C.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor

4. On a consideration of the facts and materials on record, without expressing anything on the merits of the matter, I dispose of the Crl.M.C, by permitting the petitioner to surrender before the Trial Court within a week from today and file applications before the Trial Court to get himself enlarged on bail and to recall the non-bailable warrant, after serving advance copies on the Public Prosecutor. If such applications are filed within the prescribed time period, the Trial Court is directed to consider the applications on its merits and in accordance with law, preferably on the same day the petitioner surrenders before the Trial Court. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

SD/-

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