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) 13924

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
SHAMSEER K – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 812 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.883/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.MOHAMED SABAH, SRI.LIBIN STANLEY, SMT.SAIPOOJA, SRI.SADIK ISMAYIL, SMT.R.GAYATHRI, SRI.M.MAHIN HAMZA, SHRI.ALWIN JOSEPH, SHRI.BENSON AMBROSE
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C. ASHI

Involvement in similar narcotics offenses while on bail justifies denial of bail.

Headnote:This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail. The petitioner, accused No.1, is alleged to have possessed methamphetamine violating the NDPS Act. The court found insufficient evidence linking the petitioner to the crime, yet recognized prior offenses leading to bail denial. The ruling emphasizes that involvement in similar crimes while on bail warrants rejection of bail applications, leading to the dismissal of the request for bail.

Table of Content
1. allegations of drug possession. (Para 2)
2. court's findings on bail denial. (Para 4)
3. arguments regarding innocence and evidence. (Para 5)

ORDER

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

2. The applicant is the accused No.1 in Crime No.883/2024 of Manjeri Police Station, Malappuram District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 22(b) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act).

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on

8.7.2024 at about 5 pm, the applicant and the accused No.2 were arrested by the detecting officer for possessing a total quantity of 37.080 grams of methamphetamine in contravention of the NDPS Act.

4. I have heard Sri. P. Mohamed Sabah, 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 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 granted bail by this Court on

11.9.2024 in B.A.No.6391/2024. However, as he was involved in a crime of similar nature, his bail was cancelled and he was remanded to judicial custody on 16.3.2025. Since the applicant is involved in crime of similar nature under the NDPS Act while on bail, he cannot be released on bail. 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