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) 13768

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SHANAVAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 1072 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.973/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.DILEEP P.PILLAI
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C. ASHI, SR. PP

The bail application was denied due to insufficient grounds for believing the accused's innocence under the NDPS Act.

Headnote:This application was filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for regular bail concerning Crime No.973/2024. The prosecution alleges that the applicant, an accused in a serious narcotics case, was involved in a conspiracy to secure ganja. The court concluded that the applicant failed to establish innocence or non-guilt, thus denying bail given the gravity of the charges and past criminal records. The court highlighted the impossibility of bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act without reasonable grounds for non-guilt. The bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. nature of the bail application under statutory provisions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented by both sides regarding bail. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's assessment of evidence and denial of bail. (Para 7 , 8)

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.973/2024 of Punalur Police Station, Kollam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 20 (b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, NDPS Act) and Sections 111 (2)(b), 111(4) and

238(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 11.07.2024 at about 2.00 p.m, the detecting officer had seized about 30.37 kilograms of ganja from the possession of accused No.1 from his house. The prosecution further alleged that all the other accused hatched a criminal conspiracy to secure ganja and that the contraband article was brought from Orissa at the instance of accused Nos.3 to 6.

4. I have heard Sri.Dileep P.Pillai, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.M.C.Ashi, 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 Senior 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

12.07.2024. 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. 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.

8. The applicant has strong criminal antecedents. He is involved in 25 other cases, including the offence under the NDPS Act. That apart, the trial has already commenced.

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/-

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