The Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) in Bengaluru has rejected the bail applications of three individuals arrested in connection with one of the city’s largest recent drug seizures. The order, delivered by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, Special Judge for NDPS cases, emphasized the gravity of possessing commercial quantities of narcotics and the stringent legal barriers that prevent the release of individuals accused of large-scale drug trafficking.
The petitioners, identified as Samarakara (22), Ramesh Kemundi (25), and Mangul Sisa (20), are all natives of Koraput District in Odisha. They were apprehended by the Govindapura Police in April 2022 and have been in judicial custody since. They stand charged under Section 20(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which deals with the possession of commercial quantities of cannabis, an offense that carries a minimum sentence of ten years and can extend up to twenty years of rigorous imprisonment.
Details of the Govindapura Police Raid
The case against the three Odisha natives began on April 7, 2022, following a specific intelligence report received by the Govindapura Police. The information suggested that three individuals were stationed in a vacant site behind the Forest Office road in HBR Layout, 1st Stage, with a significant stash of narcotics intended for public sale.
Acting on this tip, the police team, after obtaining the necessary permissions from the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), conducted a targeted raid at approximately 5:10 PM. Upon reaching the location, the police surrounded a room where the three suspects were residing. During the search, which was conducted in the presence of the ACP acting as a Gazetted Officer, the police uncovered a staggering 290 kilograms of ganja (cannabis). The contraband was immediately seized, and the three men were arrested on the spot.
Defense Claims vs. Prosecution Objections
During the bail hearing, the counsel representing the petitioners argued that the accused were innocent and had been falsely implicated by the police. The defense contended that the mandatory procedures outlined under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, were not strictly followed during the recovery process. They further claimed that the petitioners had deep roots in society and were willing to offer solvent sureties to ensure their regular appearance in court if released.
Conversely, the Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail plea, highlighting the massive quantity of the seized drug. The state argued that 290 kilograms of ganja is nearly fifteen times the threshold for “commercial quantity,” which is set at 20 kilograms. The prosecution expressed serious concerns that if released, the petitioners, being from a distant state like Odisha, would likely abscond to evade trial. Furthermore, the state emphasized the lethal impact of such a high volume of drugs on the younger generation and the general public.
Judicial Reasoning: The Rigors of Section 37
In her detailed order, Judge B.S. Jayashree applied the stringent standards required by Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. This section stipulates that for offenses involving 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 that they are not likely to commit any offense while on bail.
The court referred to the landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Kerala vs. Rajesh (2020), which clarified that “reasonable grounds” means something more than prima facie grounds. The judge noted that the liberal approach typically applied to bail under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is entirely uncalled for in cases governed by the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
The judge observed that the recovery of 290 kilograms of ganja from the conscious possession of the accused was a significant factor. She stated that the liberty of an individual must be balanced against the interests of society. In cases where lethal substances are involved in such high volumes, the court held that it is in the interest of the public to keep the accused behind bars during the pendency of the legal proceedings.
Final Ruling
The court concluded that the petitioners failed to provide any substantial evidence or material to prove their innocence or to negate the prosecution’s claims regarding the recovery. Given the prima facie evidence of their involvement in large-scale drug trafficking and the risk of them fleeing the jurisdiction of the court, the bail application was denied.
The court officially rejected the petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Samarakara, Ramesh Kemundi, and Mangul Sisa will remain in judicial custody as the trial for Crime No. 44/2022 continues in the Special NDPS Court.