Bengaluru, November 22, 2022 – Abdul Rahim, identified as Accused No. 3 in a significant drug trafficking case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, was today granted anticipatory bail by the XXXIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge & Special Judge (NDPS) in Bengaluru. The court, citing lack of direct evidence and the conclusion of the police investigation, allowed the petition in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 11042/2022.
The Prosecution’s Case and Charges
The case stems from a raid conducted on April 3, 2021, by the Narcotics Wing of the Central Crime Branch, based on credible information regarding drug sales near Ramaiah North City Gate.
- Apprehension and Seizure: Two individuals, identified as Accused No. 1 and Accused No. 2, were apprehended at the spot. From their possession, the police seized 60 grams of Hydro Ganja and 0.28 grams of LSD strips.
- Implication of A3: The petitioner, Abdul Rahim, was implicated as Accused No. 3 based solely on the voluntary statement given by the arrested co-accused (A1 and A2). They alleged that Rahim had supplied the money, booked the drugs through platforms like Vicker mi App.net and Vegator Telegram app, and completed the purchase via Bitcoin payment.
- Charges: The case, registered as Cr. No. 84/2021 by Sampigehalli Police Station, charges the accused under Section 8(c) and Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act, which are serious non-bailable offences punishable with imprisonment up to 10 years.
Petitioner’s Defense and Court’s Rationale
The petitioner’s counsel argued that Abdul Rahim was falsely implanted in the case. Key points raised in the defense included:
- No Direct Link: No contraband was seized from the petitioner’s possession, nor was he apprehended at the scene of the crime with the other accused.
- Weak Evidence: The only material connecting him to the crime is the uncorroborated statement of the co-accused, which is inadmissible as substantive evidence.
- Parity and Investigation: Accused No. 1 and Accused No. 2 had already been released on bail by the High Court, and crucially, the investigation had concluded with the filing of the charge sheet.
Presiding Judge Smt. B.S. Jayashree, LL.M., agreed with the petitioner’s arguments, noting that the Investigating Agency had failed to place any material before the court at the present stage to demonstrate the petitioner’s active involvement in the sale and purchase of the contraband, apart from the co-accused’s statement.
The court held that since the investigation was concluded, the petitioner’s custody was not necessary and the prosecution’s apprehension of flight or evidence tampering could be adequately addressed through the imposition of stringent bail conditions.
Strict Conditions for Release
In allowing the petition, the court directed the Sampigehalli Police to release Abdul Rahim on bail in the event of his arrest, subject to the execution of a personal bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum.
The release is subject to strict compliance with the following conditions:
- The petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days from the date of the order.
- He must co-operate with the investigating agency.
- He is prohibited from making any inducement, threat, or promise to witnesses.
- He must attend before the Court on all dates of hearing and shall not leave the court’s jurisdiction without prior permission.
- He shall not threaten or try to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
- He is forbidden from committing similar or any other offence while on bail.
- Breach of any of the conditions would automatically lead to the cancellation of bail.