IN THE COURT OF THE XXXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE & SPL. JUDGE (NDPS), BENGALURU. CCH.33. PRESENT: SMT. B.S. JAYASHREE, LL.M., XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE (NDPS), BENGALURU. DATED: THIS THE 19 th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 Crl.Misc.No.8400/2022 petitioners : 1. Kartik.K, (accused Nos.1, 4 & S/o.Kamal, A/a 18 Years, R/at 5) Durgamma Building, 1st Main Road, 1st Cross, Near Ambedkar Statue, Vibhughi Pura, Marathahalli, Bengaluru -560037 2.Sanjay Kumar.P S/o.Parmeshwar, a/a 18 years, R/at C/o Nagarj Sheet Hourse, 1st Cross, Near yellamma Tmeple, Vibhuthipura, Bengaluru -560037 3.Umesh, s/o.Vasu, a/a 22 years, R/at 12, 1st Cross Road, Near Yellamma Temple, Vibhuthipura, Marathahalli, Bengaluru -560037 (By Sri SA., Adv.) V/S. Respondent : State by HAL Police. (By Public Prosecutor) O R D E R The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioners to enlarge them on bail, in Cr.No.217/2022 of HAL PS., registered for the offences punishable U/Sec.20(b) of NDPS Act and Sec.399, 402 of IPC and Sec.25 of Arms Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioners for grant of bail
are as under: That the petitioners are very innocent and law abiding citizens. They have not committed any offence much less the offence as alleged. They have been falsely implicated by the respondent in this case. The petitioners had no intention to commit any offence of decoity nor they were having any weapon or narcotic drugs with them. Though the alleged offence is non bailable, but is neither punishable with imprisonment for life or death sentence. The procedure contemplated under N.D.P.S. Act not followed while recovery. There is no restriction U/Sec.37 of N.D.P.S. Act for grant of bail. Petitioners are permanent residents of the address shown CCH-33 Crl.Misc.No.8400/2022 in the cause title. The petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this court in the event of grant of bails. They are ready to offer surety for their due appearance before this court. Hence, sought to grant bail.
3. The prosecution while opposing the bail petition
contended that with an intention to attack the passerby and to commit robbery the accused persons were gathered at the spot with deadly weapons like knife, long, chili powder etc. the accused persons were also possessing 500 grams of narcotic drug ganja. If petitioners are released on bail, they will continue the same and they may abscond and tamper evidence of the prosecution. Hence, sought to reject the bail plea of petitioners.
4. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the
records.
5. The points that arise for my consideration are as here
under:
1. Whether petitioners have made out sufficient grounds to enlarge them on bail?
2. What order?
6. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:- The complainant police has prosecuted
the petitioners in Cr.No.217/2022 of HAL PS., registered for the offences punishable U/Sec.20(b) of NDPS Act and Sec.399, 402 of IPC and Sec.25 of Arms Act. The gist of the complaint is as here under:- On 15.8.2022 at about 4.30 pm., when the complainant PSI., of HAL PS., was discharging duties in the police station he has received credible information that near Vibuthipura lake about 67 persons were assembled armed with deadly weapons and were planning to commit dacoity. On receipt of the information, he along with the staff went to the spot at about 5.30 pm. He has mounted surveillance at the spot and CCH-33 Crl.Misc.No.8400/2022 watching the movements of the said persons. The said persons were holding longs and observing the people who are going there by walk and their expressions seems suspicious and appears to have planned to commit robbery. On suspicion the complainant and his staff apprehended them and the weapons which were with them particularly longs were seized. On further search they were found in possession of ganja. The said ganja was also seized. They were carrying ganja with them. 500 grams of ganja seized from the possession of the accused persons. They were arrested. The said deadly weapons were seized under mahazar. Thereafter a report is prepared submitted to SHO. A case in crime No.217/2022 is registered against them for the offences punishable U/s.399 and 402 of IPC., and Sec.20(B) of NDPS Act and Sec.25 of Arms Act. The accused who were apprehended were produced before the court and were remanded to judicial custody.
8. The prosecution has filed objection contending that
the accused herein have hatched plan to commit dacoity. They were armed with deadly weapons and they were in conscious possession of ganja. In the event of grant of bail they may commit similar offences.
9. The learned counsel for petitioners argued that the
petitioners herein are innocent of the commission of offences. They have been falsely implanted in the case.
10. On looking to the investigating papers the
investigating agency has already seized the incriminatory articles from the accused persons. They were produced before the court and remanded to judicial custody. The investigating agency has not sought the police custody of the accused. The quantum of ganja seized from the possession of petitioners and other accused is to the tune of 500 grams. The accused No.5 is already been granted bail in Crl.Misc.25718/2022 vide order 26.8.2022 by the learned 57th ACMM., Bangalore. The allegation against the present petitioners are similar in nature. Further the quantum of ganja seized is small quantity as per Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Notification S.O.1055(E) dated 19.10.2001 at Sl.No.55 the narcotic drug ganja 1000 grams is small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial CCH-33 Crl.Misc.No.8400/2022 quantity. In this case the quantum of ganja seized is 500 grams of ganja is small quantity. As per the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2018 11 SCC 488 Birbal Prasad Vs., State of Bihar wherein it is held that: Ss.37 and 20 – Bail – grant of – non commercial quantity – quantity involved being only 14 Kgs., of ganja, which is a non commercial quantity appellant accused not involved in any other case – in above circumstances, held, appellant should be released on bail, pending trial – hence, directions issued to release appellant on bail, on certain conditions. The said case law aptly applies to the case on hand in holding that the contraband seized in the case on hand is intermediate quantity and it is not commercial quantity. In the said circumstances, as per the observations of Hon'ble Apex Court the bail plea of accused to be considered.
11. The petitioners are prosecuted U/s.399, 402 and
Sec.25 of Arms Act the said offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The other offence invoked against the petitioners are U/s.20(b) of NDPS Act which is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 1 year or with fine.
12. As per the information provided by the petitioners
are permanently residing in the address shown in the cause title. The apprehension of the prosecution that they may abscond and may protract the trial could be compensated by imposing stringent conditions. In the result, I answer the point for consideration in the affirmative.
14. Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioners U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed. The petitioners are enlarged on bail on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety for the like sum with following conditions.
1. The petitioners shall give attendance before the concerned I.O., once in a month i.e., preferably on first Monday of every month in between 10.00 am., to 2.00 pm., till filing of charge sheet or further orders whichever is earlier.
2. They shall not leave the jurisdiction of this court without prior permission.
CCH-33 Crl.Misc.No.8400/2022
3. They shall not tamper the witness or abscond.
4. They shall co-operate with I.O for investigation.
5. They shall not commit similar offence or any offence while on bail.
6. They shall furnish his photo ID proof and photo ID proof of his sureties.
7. Breach of any of the conditions by the petitioners would entail cancellation of bail.
[Dictated to the stenographer, directly on the computer, typed and computerised by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 19th day of September 2022] (B. S. JAYASHREE) XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE, (NDPS) : BENGALURU. CN/*