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 16th DAY OF DECEMBER 2022
Crl. Misc.No.11312/2022
petitioner :
(accused No.2)
Rizwan Pasha @ Kulla Rizwan,
S/o.Abdul Latheef, a/a 36 years,
R/at No.14, 2nd A Cross,
Kempegowda Layout, Hegdenagara,
Nageshwarahalli, Bengaluru
(By Sri.M.V.Murhty, Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by K.G.Nagar Police
(By Public Prosecutor)
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the
petitioner to enlarge him on bail, in Cr.No.119/2021 of K.G.
Nagar PS., registered for the offences punishable U/Sec.

2
22(c),27A of N.D.P.S. Act 1985 and U/Sec.25­1(B) (b) Arms Act
and U/Sec.120 B of IPC.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioner for grant of bail
are as under:
That the petitioner is innocent and law abiding citizen. he
has not committed any offence much less the offence as
alleged. He has been falsely implicated by the respondent in
this case. Though the alleged offence is non bailable, but is
neither punishable with imprisonment for life or death
sentence.

No
incriminatory
article
is
seized
from
the
possession of the petitioner herein. There is no restriction
U/Sec.37 of N.D.P.S. Act for grant of bail. The petitioner is
permanent resident of the address shown in the cause title.
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.
Hence, sought to grant bail.
3. The prosecution while opposing the bail petition
contended that the I.O has seized 20 grams of MDMA and 4
3
LSD
strips
from
the
possession
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11312/2022
of
accused
No.1­
Bharathkumar. The offences alleged against the petitioner is
punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall
not be less than 10 years which may extent to 20 years and
shall also be liable to fine. There is a prima­facie case available
against the petitioner. He is habitual drug dealer.

There is
prima­facie case made out against petitioner. If petitioner are
released on bail, he will continue the profession of narcotic
drug selling, and he may abscond and tamper evidence of the
prosecution. 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
bail?
2. What order?
6. My findings on the above points are as under:
4
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:­ The ASI, K.G. Nagar PS., Bangalore has
put the criminal law into motion.

The gist of the allegation
reads as here under:­
On 16­11­2021 ASI K.G. Nagar along with the staff was
instructed by the Police Inspector to do surveillance in regard
to illegal sale of ganja in the vicinity. As he was doing
patrolling duty at KG Nagara Main Road, he has received
credible information that accused No.1 to 5 who were released
from jail have hatched plan to kill one Belli Mohan. They were
also in possession of contraband. After confirming about the
information,
he
has
Nanjamaba
Agrhara,
been
to
Kempambudi
K.G
Nagara
and
Lake
had
bed,
mounted
surveillance in the area about 2.40 p.m. At that time accused
No. 1 to 5 came there armed with deadly weapons.

He has
immediately prepared the report and submitted before SHO
which is the basis to register the case in Crime No.119/2021
5
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11312/2022
for the offences punishable under Sec.22(c), 27A of NDPS Act
1985 and Sec.25­1(B)(b) of Arms Act against the accused No.1
to 5. Thereafter, he has informed the matter to his superior
and obtained permission to conduct raid. He along with the
panchas and staff had been to the spot and found the said
persons. On seeing them by throwing the weapons accused
Nos.2 to 5 ran away. But accused No.1 Bharath Kumar @
Ganji was apprehended by them.
The present petitioner/accused No.2 is alleged to have
possessed a deadly weapon. On further enquiry accused No.1
has stated that he along with other accused persons is doing
drug peddling. ACP was called to the spot, he has conducted
personal search of accused No.1. During personal search 20
grams of MDMA and 4 LSD strips were recovered.

A detail
mahazar was drawn in the spot. Articles were seized under
detail mahazar. Accused No. 1 was arrested in the spot. The
remaining accused including the present petitioner ran away
from the spot. A detailed report is submitted before
SHO.,
Accused No.1 is produced before the court and remanded to
JC. Accused No.2/present petitioner is arrested on 22.07.2022
6
at
Shimoga.

interrogation
He
he
was
has
taken
revealed
to
police
that
he
custody.
is
During
having
close
acquaintance with other accused. He is also prosecuted in
several criminal cases which are heinous in nature of different
police stations. Later he is produced before the court and
remanded to JC.
8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner that
he is planted in the case by the complainant he is unaware of
seized drug.

The seized article is not commercial quantity.

Therefore, NDPS Act is not applicable.

9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioner has
committed heinous offence and the drugs were seized from his
custody.

The
offence
alleged
against
the
petitioner
is
punishable with imprisonment upto 20 years and he is
habitual offender. In the event of release on bail he may
abscond and hamper the investigation. There are prima­facie
material available against him.

CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11312/2022
7
10. On careful perusal of material available on record, 20
grams of MDMA have been seized from the possession of
accused No.1 on 13.10.2022.

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.134 the narcotic drug ­ MDMA weighing 10 grams is a
commercial quantity. In the present case 20 grams of MDMA
narcotic substance is seized from accused No.1. the allegation
against the present petitioner is he was accompanying accused
Nos.1, 3 to 5 when the police intercepted and he was armed
with deadly weapon. When they were intercepted accused no.1
was caught and other accused along with the present
petitioner ran away from the spot. Though he was taken to
police custody there is no recovery of incriminatory article at
his instance.

No doubt, there are several cases pending
against the present petitioner, but in regard to his direct
involvement in drug peddling there are no sufficient material
placed by the investigating agency.

The accused No.1 is
already been enlarged on statutory bail by this court. The only
8
allegation
against
the
present
petitioner
is
he
was
accompanying other accused on the date of apprehension of
accused No.1. but in regard to procuring of contraband and
drug peddling there is no sufficient material.

The petitioner
herein is in judicial custody since the date of arrest.
major portion of the investigation is concluded.

The
Further
custodial interrogation is not warranted in the circumstances
of the case.

Recovery is already made.

On looking to the
nature and gravity of allegations leveled against the petitioner
if by imposing stringent conditions he is enlarged on bail it
would not in any way hamper the investigation. In the result, I
proceed to answer the point No.1 in the affirmative.
12. Point No.2:­ In the result, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.439
of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing
personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/­ with two
sureties for the like sum with following conditions.
1.

The petitioner shall give attendance before
the concerned I.O., once in a month i.e.,
CCH­33
Crl.Misc.No.11312/2022
9
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.

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

3.

He shall
abscond.

4.

He
shall
co­operate
investigation.

5.

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

6.

He shall furnish his photo ID proof and
local address proof document before the
court and photo ID proof of his sureties.

7.

He shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.

8.

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

not
tamper
the
with
witness
I.O
or
for
[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 16th day of December 2022]
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*