The Special Court for NDPS cases in Bengaluru has passed a significant order denying the second bail application of three individuals from Odisha who were allegedly caught transporting a massive quantity of narcotics into the city. Smt. B.S. Jayashree, the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS, delivered the verdict on April 18, 2024, emphasizing the stringent legal barriers for bail when commercial quantities of drugs are involved.

The petitioners, identified as Kunna Sunna (36), Jalendar Harijan (27), and Jagadhish Nayak (34), all residents of various districts in Odisha, had moved the court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They were seeking release from judicial custody in connection with Crime No. 359/2023 of the Cottonpet Police Station, where they face charges under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Details of the Massive Narcotics Interception

The case dates back to September 14, 2023, when the Central Crime Branch (CCB) received credible information regarding the movement of narcotics within the limits of the Cottonpet Police Station. Acting on this tip, a team led by the Police Inspector obtained the necessary permissions and intercepted a Swift Desire car bearing an Odisha registration number (OD-24-J 5932) on Cottonpet Main Road.

Upon inspecting the vehicle, the authorities discovered three individuals inside. A thorough search of the car revealed several packets of ganja wrapped in khaki-colored cello tape and concealed inside cement bags. The total weight of the seized contraband was a staggering 161 kilograms and 400 grams. The three occupants were immediately arrested and have remained in judicial custody since their apprehension.

Arguments for and against Bail

The counsel for the petitioners argued that the trio were innocent, law-abiding citizens who had been falsely implicated in the case. The defense contended that the mandatory procedures for recovery under the NDPS Act were not followed by the investigating agency. They further argued that the petitioners had no active role in any drug syndicate and were willing to provide adequate sureties and abide by any conditions the court might impose.

The prosecution, represented by the Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the release of the accused. The state argued that the quantity of ganja seized was a “commercial quantity,” far exceeding the 20-kilogram threshold defined by law. The prosecution highlighted that the investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed, revealing sufficient evidence of the petitioners’ involvement. They raised concerns that if released, the accused might flee to their home state of Odisha or engage in similar illegal activities, potentially ruining the lives of the younger generation by distributing drugs.

The Rigors of Section 37 and Court’s Ruling

In its detailed reasoning, the court focused on the specific legal hurdles presented by Section 37 of the NDPS Act. This section mandates that for commercial quantities, bail can only be granted if the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail.

Judge B.S. Jayashree noted that the seizure of 161.4 kg of ganja constitutes a significant commercial quantity. The court referenced several Supreme Court precedents, including the case of Union of India vs. Mohammed Nawaz Khan and State of Kerala vs. Rajesh, which dictate that a “liberal approach” in NDPS bail matters is uncalled for.

The judge observed that the mere fact that the petitioners had been in custody for some time or that the charge sheet had been filed was not a persuasive enough reason to bypass the requirements of Section 37. The court found that the petitioners failed to demonstrate “reasonable grounds” to believe they were not guilty of the conscious possession of the drugs found in their vehicle.

The court further emphasized that the NDPS Act was designed to provide deterrent punishment to curb the menace of drug trafficking. Given the prima facie evidence and the gravity of the charges, the court concluded that the petitioners had not made out sufficient grounds for release.

Consequently, the court rejected the second bail petition of Kunna Sunna, Jalendar Harijan, and Jagadhish Nayak, reinforcing the judicial stance on large-scale narcotics smuggling.