The XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS cases in Bengaluru, Smt. B.S. Jayashree, has granted interim bail to Guttula Teju, the second accused in a significant drug trafficking case involving the seizure of Ephedrine. The court’s decision was influenced by humanitarian grounds concerning the health of the petitioner’s spouse, despite strong opposition from the prosecution regarding the nature of the contraband and the petitioner’s criminal history.

The legal proceedings, registered under OR No.02/2022-23, involve serious allegations under Sections 8(c), 9A, 25A, 28, and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The case originated from the interception of a courier shipment that was intended for export but was returned to India following a delivery failure in Canada.

Details of the Investigation and Seizure

The investigation began on April 29, 2022, when Customs officials at the Bengaluru Airport and Air Cargo Complex acted on credible information regarding suspicious materials hidden within a courier shipment. The parcel, which had been shipped from Vijayawada to Ontario, Canada, was returned to India after the intended recipient rejected it, claiming the parcel did not belong to him.

Upon its return to the DHL Express facility in Bengaluru, the cargo was subjected to X-ray scanning, which revealed the presence of organic materials concealed inside. Subsequent enquiries by the Investigating Officer (IO) revealed that the shipment was a “switched cargo”—a term used to describe goods shipped to the wrong consignee. The petitioner, Guttula Teju, an employee of a courier agency, reportedly came forward to claim ownership of the shipment.

In the presence of independent witnesses, the parcel was opened to reveal an assortment of ladies’ apparel, including sarees, nighties, and chudidars. Hidden within the folds of these garments, officials discovered transparent polythene packets containing a white crystalline powder. Testing with a drug detection kit confirmed the substance to be Ephedrine, a controlled substance under the NDPS Act. The total weight of the seized drugs was 4.496 kilograms, with an estimated market value of approximately nine crore rupees.

Arguments Presented by the Defense and Prosecution

The counsel for Guttula Teju argued that the petitioner was an innocent law-abiding citizen who had been falsely implicated. The defense contended that the petitioner had merely collected the consignment from a customer named K. Gopi Sai at Vijayawada for booking purposes and was not aware of the illicit contents. They further argued that the mandatory procedural requirements of the NDPS Act were not strictly followed during the search and seizure.

A significant portion of the defense’s argument focused on the classification of the seized substance. They cited various High Court precedents to suggest that Ephedrine is a “controlled substance” rather than a narcotic drug in the traditional sense, arguing that the strict rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which makes bail difficult to obtain in commercial quantity cases, should not apply.

Conversely, the Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State through Customs (CIU) vehemently opposed the bail. The prosecution highlighted that Guttula Teju had explicitly claimed ownership of the parcel through various correspondences and letters. They also pointed out the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, noting that he is currently facing charges in another NDPS and fraud case in Vijayawada (Cr. No. 403/2020). The prosecution expressed fears that if released, the accused might tamper with evidence or flee from justice.

The Court’s Ruling and Conditions of Bail

In its deliberation, the court acknowledged the gravity of the offense and the substantial value of the seized Ephedrine. However, the court took note of additional grounds filed by the petitioner regarding his wife’s deteriorating health. Medical reports were produced to demonstrate that his wife required urgent medical attention and that there was no one else to provide the necessary care.

The court observed that since the final report had already been filed and the petitioner was no longer required for custodial interrogation, a temporary release on humanitarian grounds was justifiable. The judge noted that the interim bail would allow the petitioner to facilitate his wife’s treatment without significantly hampering the progress of the trial.

The court granted interim bail to Guttula Teju for a period of three months subject to the following conditions:

The petitioner must execute a personal bond of Rs. 1 lakh with two sureties of the like sum.

He is required to surrender before the court upon the expiry of the three-month period.

He is strictly prohibited from tampering with witnesses or committing any further offenses while on bail.

He must provide monthly medical reports to the court regarding the progress of his wife’s health and the treatment being provided.

The case remains a significant one for Bengaluru’s special NDPS court as it balances the stringent requirements of drug enforcement laws with the personal circumstances of the accused.