н IN THE COURT OF THE XXXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE & SPL. JUDGE (NDPS), BENGALURU.
CCH.33.
PRESENT:
SMT. B.S. JAYASHREE, LL.M.,
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE (NDPS),
BENGALURU.
DATED: THIS THE 22nd DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022
Crl.Misc.No.11042/2022
Petitioner :
(accused No.3)
Abdul Rahim, S/o.Ashraf Kaniya
Kandi, 28 years, R/at No.21, Ground
Floor, Kurubarahalli Pipe Line Road,
Near Shiva Temple, Kaverinagar,
Basaveshwara nagar, Bengaluruн
560079
(By Sri Viswanatha.K.S., Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Sampigehalli PS
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.438 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the
petitioner to enlarge him on bail in the event of his arrest in
Cr.No.84/2021 of Sampigehalli
PS. (Spl.CC.2077/2022),
2
registered for the offences punishable U/Sec.8(c), 22(c) of
NDPS Act .

2. The grounds urged by the petitioner for grant of bail
are as under:
That the petitioner is very innocent and law abiding
citizen.

He has not committed any offence much less the
offence as alleged. He has no knowledge of alleged crime and
falsely implanted basing on the statement of coнaccused.
Complainant has shown this petitioner as accused No.3 in the
aforesaid crime. The alleged seizure of substances from the
other accused cannot be connected to the present petitioner
and the said seizure was from the individual possession of
other accused, therefore the petitioner is not liable directly or
indirectly. Petitioner cannot be connected to the seizure of
contraband article effected form other accused, because this
petitioner has not found in the company of other accused, from
the possession of petitioner no contraband was seized and was
not apprehended with the other accused persons and no
3
CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.11042/2022
seizure was done in his presence. No other independent
material either direct or circumstantial in nature is collected to
connect the petitioner for the alleged seizure and therefore
primaнfacie there is no material to show that the petitioner is
involved in the commission of alleged offence and hence he is
entitled for anticipatory bail. Accused No.1 and 2 were released
on bail by the HonТble High Court, even in the charge sheet
also no materials have been showed against this petitioner,
thus this petitioner is standing on the better footing, therefore
he is also entitled for anticipatory bail.

Though the alleged
offence is non bailable, but is neither punishable with
imprisonment for life or death sentence.

The petitioner is
ready and willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this
court in the event of grant of bail. He is ready to offer surety
for his due appearance before this court. He has no bad
antecedents. He is the sole bread earner of his family. Hence,
sought to grant bail.

4
3. The objection raised by the prosecution is that the
investigating agency has in all seized 60 gram of Hydro Ganja
and 0.28 Gram of LSD Strips from the possession of the
accused No.1 and 2.

A detailed mahazar is drawn in the spot.

The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable with
rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall extend upto 10
years. There is a primaнfacie case available against the
petitioner.

He is an habitual drug dealer.

In the event of
grant of bail, he would abscond and may hamper the
investigation.

Hence, sought to reject the bail plea of
petitioner.

4. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the
records.

5. The points that arise for my consideration are as here
under:
1. Whether petitioner has made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge him on
anticipatory bail?
2. What order?

CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.11042/2022
5
6. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:н A report submitted by PI., Narcotics
Wing,
Central
Crime
Branch,
Bengaluru,
who
complainant in this case before the Sampigehalli
is
the
PS.

The
when
the
contents of the report is here under:н
On
03.04.2021
at
about
9.00
am.,
complainant discharging duties in the office received credible
information that at Ramaiah North City Gate opp. Elements
Mall, near R.K. Hegade Rural Main Road, Bengaluru two
persons were selling LSD paper and Hydro Ganja in public. He
has informed the matter
to his superior officer, obtained
permission to conduct raid, secured panchas and staff
members and went to the spot. When he had been to the spot
found two persons. They were apprehended, on enquiry they
have reveled there name as Harshith Nayaka and Uttam
Chand they have given their detailed address. On search of the
6
said accused person they seized 60 grams of hydro Ganja and
0.28 grams of LSD and drew panchanama.

Thereafter the
accused No.1 and 2 were arrested the accused and produced
before the Court and remanded to judicial custody.
During the voluntary statement of accused NO.1 and 2
they have stated that one Abdul Rahim , S/o Ahsraff K.K, R/o
Kurubarahalli, had given money to purchase drugs, he has
booked the drugs through Vicker mi App.net and Vegator
Telegram app. He has purchased the drugs through Bitcoin
payment. After purchase they were sharing with their friends.
Basing on the said statement, the present petitioner is
prosecuted in the present case as Accused No.3.
The accused no.1 and 2 were arrested in the case, from
their Conscious possession 60 grams of hydro Ganja and 0.28
grams of LSD were seized and drew a detail seizure
panchanama. Thereafter, he has prepared a detail report and
submitted before the SHO, which is the basis to register the
case against the accused in Cr.No.84/2021 for the offence
punishable U/Sec. 8(c), 22(c) of NDPS Act .

7
8.

CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.11042/2022
The petitioner contends that he has been falsely
implanted in the case.

The quantum of Ganja seized from
accused No.1 and 2 is 60 grams of hydro Ganja and 0.28
grams of LSD he is no way connected to the said seizure. It is
contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that basing
on the statement of accused No.3, the investigating agency is
trying to apprehend the present petitioner. From accused No.1
& 2 contraband is seized. The present petitioner is no way way
connected to the crime. In the event of grant of bail he is ready
to offer solvent surety.

9. The prosecution contends that petitioner herein is a
habitual offender. The offence alleged against the petitioner is
publishable with imprisonment upto 10 years and fine. There
are
sufficient
materials
available
against
the
petitioner
attracting 8(c), 22(c) of the Act. In the event of grant of bail he
would abscond and hamper the investigation.

10. On collective scrutiny of the rival contentions, as per
the prosecution papers the A1 & 2 were in conscious
8
possession of 60 grams of hydro Ganja and 0.28 grams of LSD
As per the statement of accused No.1 and 2 the present
petitioner had supplied LSD papers to the accused no.1 and 2.
In the police final report it is alleged that the accused no.3 has
supplied LSD strips to A1 and A2.

But, at this stage the
investigating agency has failed to place any material before this
court to show that the present petitioner along with the A1 are
doing the sale and purchase of contraband. When the accused
no.1 and 2 has revealed the name of present petitioner, the
investigating agency has not made any attempts to secure him.
Now the investigation in the case is concluded and charge
sheet is filed. If the petitioner is required for the investigation,
by imposing stringent condition he is enlarged on the bail it
would suffice the apprehension of prosecution. In the result, I
answer the point for consideration in the affirmative.

12. Point No.2:н In the result, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.438
of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.

CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.11042/2022
9
The respondent police is directed to release the
petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in
Cr.No.84/2021 of Sampigehalli
Police Station for
the offences punishable U/s.8(c), 22(C) of NDPS Act,
on
executing
personal
bond
for
a
sum
of
Rs.1,00,000/н with two sureties for the like sum
with following conditions:н
1)
the accused shall appear before the IO with
in fifteen days from the date of this order for
the purpose of investigation.

2)
He shall coнoperate with the investigating
agency.

2)
He shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with facts of the case, so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to
the Court or to any police officer.

3)
He shall attend before the Court on all dates
of hearing without fail and shall not leave the
jurisdiction of this court till the conclusion of
trial without prior permission of this court.

4)
He shall not threaten or try to tamper with
the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

5)
He shall not commit similar offence or
any offence while on bail.

6)
He shall furnish his photo ID proof and photo
identity proof of their surety.

10
7)
Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioner would entail cancellation of bail.

[Dictated to the stenographer, directly on the computer, typed and
computerised by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in
Open Court on this the 22nd day of November 2022]
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CRR/*