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 23rd DAY OF AUGUST 2022
Crl. Misc.No.7517/2022
petitioners :
(accused Nos.1 to 3)
1. Aravinda.K.R., S/o Ravi,
Aged about 26 years,
Residing at No.4, 2nd
cross,1st main, Kadabagere
cross, Kittanahalli,
Devanajaiahnapalaya,
Bangalore. Permanent
address Bellur cross, Kunigal
Taluk, Tumkur District.
2. Pavankumar @ Pandu
S/o Rajan, Aged About 27
years, Residing at Rented
house belongs to
Lakshmamma, Near
Annapoorneshwari School,
Andanappa Layout, Magadi
Road, Tavarekere, Bangalore
District.
3. Amzad Ithiyar @Irshad
S/o Abubkar, Aged about 27
years, Residing at Mudipu,
Hechkal Panchayathi,
Mangalore District.
(By Sri C. Rajanna Adv).

2
V/S.

State by Begur P S
Respondent :
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by
the petitioners to enlarge them on bail, in Cr.No.187/2022
of
Begur
PS.,
registered
for
the
offence
punishable
U/Sec.20(b) of NDPS Act.

2. The grounds urged by the petitioners for grant of
bail are as under:
That the petitioners are very innocent and law abiding
citizen. They have not committed any offence much less the
offence as alleged. They have been falsely implicated by the
respondent in this case.

Though the alleged offences are
non bailable, but is neither punishable with imprisonment
for life or death sentence. The procedure contemplated
under N.D.P.S. Act not followed while recovery. petitioners
have
no
criminal
antecedents.

The
petitioners
are
permanent resident of the address shown in the cause title.
The petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any
3
CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.7517/2022
conditions imposed by this court in the event of grant of
bail. they are ready to offer surety for his due appearance
before this court. Hence, sought to grant bail.

3. The prosecution while opposing the bail petition
contended that the I.O has seized 6 Kgs., 380
grams of
ganja from accused Nos.1 to 3. The offences alleged against
the petitioners are punishable with rigorous imprisonment
for a term upto 20 years and shall also be liable to fine.
There is a primafacie case available against the petitioners.
they are habitual drug dealer.

There is primafacie case
made out against petitioners. If petitioners are released on
bail, they will continue the profession of narcotic drug
selling, and they may abscond and tamper evidence of the
prosecution. Hence, sought to reject the bail plea of
petitioners.

4. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the
records.
5. The points that arise for my consideration are as
here under:
4
1. Whether petitioners have made out
sufficient grounds to enlarge them on
bail?
2. What order?
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: The PI of Beguru PS., has put the
criminal law into motion. The gist of the allegation reads as
here under:н
On
15.7.2022 at about 10.30 am., when the
complainant and the Head Constable were on duty of
tracing the accused persons in relation to the cases which
were registered in their station, he has received a credible
information through an informant that some persons had
come to Devarachikkanahalli bus stop around 9.00 am.,
near RTO., office in an under construction building and sold
the prohibited contraband to the public and the said
persons they may come to the said place again. On receipt
of information they have registered a suoнmoto case against
the unknown persons in Cr.No,.187/2022 for the offence
CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.7517/2022
5
publishable U/s.20(B) of NDPS Act.

Thereafter, the
complainant has informed the matter to the higher officer,
obtained permission to conduct raid. On 18.7.2022 the
complainant got information that the said persons have
come to the said spot and selling drugs, he along with
panchas and staff, investigation tools has been to the spot
at about 3.00 pm., there some three persons were found
moving suspiciously. They were apprehended. On enquiry
they have revealed their names and addresses.

During
personal search of accused No.1н 2 Kgs., 130 grams of
ganja, 10 grams of ganja in 8 plastic covers, 20 small
packets, one electronic weighing machine, school bag,
Rs.800/н cash were found.

During personal search of
accused No.2, 2 Kgs., 120 grams of ganja, from accused
No.3 Ц 2 Kgs., 130 grams of ganja were found.

The said
articles were seized under detail mahazar. On enquiry they
have revealed that they have purchased ganja from one
Prabhu of Bidar. The accused Nos.1 to 3 were arrested and
produced before the court and were remanded to judicial
custody. The present petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in
the case. The IO., has sought police custody of accused and
6
they were ordered to be sent to police custody. When the
accused were taken to police custody they have revealed
about one Prabhu who is supplying ganja to the sellers and
customers.

The said Prabhu used to visit Bangalore on
Wednesdays. As per the statement of accused on 20.7.2022
the complainant PSI., along with other police officials has
mounted surveillance at Bolagutta road, NICE road, in the
vacant space, accused Nos.4 to 7 were found in a goods
jeep, accused Nos.1 to 3 have shown the said persons to the
police. Accused Nos.4 to 7 were apprehended in the spot.
When the vehicle was inspected there is stock of 168 Kgs.,
638 grams of ganja. Accused Nos.4 to 7 were arrested. One
auto rickshaw and Mahendra Bolero Jeep was seized, entire
ganja was seized. Thereafter, they were produced before the
court.
8.

It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioners
that they was planted in the case by the complainant police
they are unaware of seized drug. The seized article is not
commercial quantity. The mandatory provisions of Sec.41,
42, 50, 52 and 47 of the Act are not complied.

The
contraband seized from the present petitioners is not
7
CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.7517/2022
commercial quantity. They are permanent residents of the
address given in the cause title. In the event of grant of bail
they are ready to abide by the conditions which are being
imposed by this court.

9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioners
are committed heinous offence huge quantity of ganja is
seized from the petitioners and other accused. The offence
punishable with imprisonment upto 20 years and with fine.
There are primaнfacie material available against them.

10.

On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
18.7.2022 the complainant has conducted raid and he has
apprehended the petitioners herein. On looking to the
seizure panchanama the drugs seized is weighing 6 Kgs.,
380
grams of ganja.

As per specification of small and
commercial quantity of narcotic drug or psychotropic
substance issued by Ministry of Finance Department of
Revenue Notification S.O.1055(E) dated 19.10.2001 at
Sl.No.55 the narcotic drugнganja 1000 grams is small
quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial quantity. In this case
8
the quantum of ganja seized is 6 Kgs., 380 grams is a
intermediary quantity.
11.

Here in this case the drugs seized by the
investigating agency to the tune of 6 Kgs. 380 grams of
ganja from the accused. As per the decision of Hon’ble Apex
Court reported in 2018 11 SCC 488 Birbal Prasad Vs.,
State of Bihar wherein it is held that:
Ss.37 and 20 Ц Bail Ц grant of Ц non commercial quantity
Ц quantity involved being only 14 Kgs., of ganja, which is
a non commercial quantity appellant accused not involved
in any other case Ц in above circumstances, held,
appellant should be released on bail, pending trial Ц
hence, directions issued to release appellant on bail, on
certain conditions.

The said case law aptly applies to the case on hand in
holding that the contraband seized in the case on hand is
intermediate quantity and it is not commercial quantity. In
the said circumstances, as per the observations of Hon’ble
Apex Court the bail plea of accused to be considered.
Here in this case, from the present petitioners are 6
Kgs., 380 grams of ganja and which would not fall within
the ambit of commercial quantity. When the quantity is less
CCHн33
Crl.Misc.No.7517/2022
9
than commercial quantity, rigors of Sec.37 of the NDPS Act
will not attract, and factors become similar to bail petitions
under regular statues normal, unless the prosecution points
towards exceptional circumstances. The accused herein is
not having previous criminal antecedents. they are not an
habitual offender. Major portion of the investigation in the
case is concluded.

The incriminatory article is already
seized. The offence alleged against the petitioners are not
punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
custodial interrogation is not warranted.
information
provided
by
the
petitioners
Further
As per the
they
are
permanently residing in the addresses shown in the cause
title.

The apprehension of the prosecution that they may
abscond and may protract the trial could be compensated
by imposing stringent conditions. 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 petitioners U/Sec.439
of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.

10
The petitioners are enlarged on bail on
executing
personal
bond
for
a
sum
of
Rs.1,00,000/н each with two sureties for the like
sum with following conditions.
1.

The petitioners shall give attendance before
the concerned I.O., once in a month i.e.,
preferably on first Monday of every month in
between 10.00 am., to 2.00 pm., till filing of
charge sheet or further orders whichever is
earlier.

2.

They shall not leave the jurisdiction of this
court without prior permission.

3.

They shall
abscond.

4.

They shall
investigation.

5.

They shall not commit similar offence or
any offence while on bail.

6.

They shall furnish his photo ID proof and
photo ID proof of his sureties.

7.

They shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

8.

Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioners would entail cancellation of bail.

not
tamper
coнoperate
the
with
witness
I.O
or
for
[Dictated to the Judgment Writer, directly on the computer, typed
and computerised by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced
by me in Open Court on this the 23rd day of August 2022]
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*