The XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS cases in Bengaluru has granted bail to Imran Khan, also known as Biriyani, who was arrayed as the fourth accused in a high-profile drug trafficking case. The decision, delivered by Judge Smt. B.S. Jayashree, comes despite the prosecution’s claims that the case involves commercial quantities of synthetic drugs, including MDMA and LSD.
The legal proceedings, registered under Crime No. 2/2023 by the J.J. Nagar Police Station, involve serious charges under Sections 8(c), 20(ii)(B), and 22(B)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. While the initial arrests involved the seizure of significant contraband, the court’s decision to enlarge the petitioner on bail hinged on the lack of direct recovery and the nature of the evidence linking him to the crime.
Background of the Case and Police Raid
The case originated on January 2, 2023, when the J.J. Nagar Police received credible intelligence regarding the sale of narcotics near the Edga Ground in Old Guddadahalli. According to the police report, three individuals were allegedly selling Ganja, MDMA crystals, and LSD strips to students and local residents frequenting the playground.
Following a coordinated raid, the police apprehended three suspects (Accused Nos. 1 to 3). A search of their person and belongings led to the recovery of 25 grams of MDMA Crystal and 0.35 grams of LSD strips. Under the NDPS Act, these weights are classified as commercial quantities. Specifically, for MDMA, any amount exceeding 10 grams is considered commercial, while for LSD, the threshold is 0.1 grams.
The petitioner, Imran Khan @ Biriyani, was not present at the scene of the raid. His involvement was alleged based on the “voluntary statements” provided by the first three accused individuals during their custodial interrogation. They claimed that Imran Khan was the primary supplier who provided them with the contraband for distribution. Based on this information, the police arrested Khan on January 5, 2023.
Arguments Presented in Court
The counsel representing Imran Khan, Sri Lokesh Y, argued that his client was a law-abiding citizen who had been falsely implicated in the case. The defense emphasized that there was no “active part” played by the petitioner and that the police had failed to follow the mandatory procedural safeguards contemplated under the NDPS Act during the investigation. Crucially, the defense pointed out that no drugs were actually recovered from Khan’s possession.
On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail petition. The state argued that the MDMA seized was of a commercial quantity, which carries a stringent punishment of 10 to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. The prosecution expressed concerns that the petitioner was part of a larger network targeting the younger generation and that his release could lead to the tampering of witnesses or the continuation of similar criminal activities.
The Court’s Observations and Reasoning
In reviewing the bail application, Judge B.S. Jayashree analyzed the gravity of the offense against the quality of the evidence. The court noted that while the substances seized from Accused Nos. 1 to 3 indeed constituted a commercial quantity, the case against Imran Khan was built entirely on the statements of co-accused individuals.
The court observed that the investigating agency had produced no independent material or documentary evidence to substantiate the claim that the petitioner supplied the drugs. “There is no recovery of contraband from the present petitioner,” the judge remarked, noting that without such recovery or supporting documentation, the continued custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not warranted, especially since the major portion of the investigation was already concluded.
Furthermore, the court took into account that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Bengaluru and that the apprehension of him fleeing or absconding could be mitigated by imposing strict conditions.
Bail Conditions Imposed
The court allowed the petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., ordering the release of Imran Khan on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of a similar sum. To ensure his cooperation with the ongoing legal process, the court imposed several stringent conditions:
- Attendance: The petitioner must report to the Investigating Officer once a month, specifically on the first Monday, until the charge sheet is filed.
- Jurisdictional Limits: He is prohibited from leaving the court’s jurisdiction without prior permission.
- Integrity of Evidence: He must not tamper with witnesses or attempt to abscond.
- Cooperation: He is mandated to cooperate fully with the Investigating Officer as required.
- Criminal Conduct: He must not commit any similar or other offenses while out on bail.
- Documentation: He must furnish valid photo ID and address proof for himself and his sureties.
The court concluded by warning that any breach of these conditions would lead to the immediate cancellation of the bail. This ruling underscores the judicial principle that while the NDPS Act is stringent, the deprivation of liberty requires substantial evidence beyond the mere statements of co-accused individuals.