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 12 th DAY OF AUGUST 2022 Crl. Misc.No.7914/2022 Petitioner : Syed Abid Pasha, S/o.Syed Azgar, (accused No.2) 36 years, residing at Medimallasandra Post, Medimallasanda, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore rural district, Karnataka 560 067. (By Sri SH., Adv). V/S. Respondent : State by V.V Puram PS Bangalore City. (By Public Prosecutor) O R D E R The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioner to enlarge him on bail, in in Cr.No.99/2022 of VV Puram PS., registered for the offence punishable U/Sec.20(b) of NDPS Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioner for grant of bail
are as under: That the petitioner is very innocent and law abiding citizen. He has not committed any offence much less the offence as alleged. He has been falsely implicated by the respondent in this case. Though the alleged offences are 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. Petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The petitioner is permanent resident of the address shown in the cause title. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this court in the event of grant of bail. He is ready to offer surety for his due appearance before this court. Hence, sought to grant bail.
3. The prosecution while opposing the bail petition
contended that the I.O has seized 8 Kgs., 190 grams of ganja. The offences alleged against the petitioner is punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term upto 20 years and shall also be liable to fine. There is a primafacie case available against the petitioner. He is habitual drug CCH-33 Crl.Misc.No.7914/2022 dealer. There is primafacie case made out against petitioner. If petitioner is released on bail, he will continue the profession of narcotic drug selling, and he may abscond and tamper evidence of the prosecution. Hence, sought to reject the bail plea of petitioner.
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 petitioner has made out sufficient grounds to enlarge him 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 PI of V.V.Puram PS., has put the
criminal law into motion. The gist of the allegation reads as here under:- On 27.7.2022, at 2.00 pm., when the complainant was discharging duties in the station, he has received a credible information that at VV Puram service road, near Water tank some persons are selling contraband to the public. The complainant ASI., has reported the matter to the ACP, VV Puram, obtained permission to conduct raid. He along with panchas had been to the spot. At about 2.30 pm., when they were in the spot mounting surveillance, two persons were showing the bag to the public, on suspicion they were apprehended and questioned about the contents of the bag. On enquiry they have revealed that they are possessing ganja. The bag was opened the contents were taken out, it was found to be 8 Kgs., 190 grams of ganja on weighing the same. The ACP., VV Puram was called to the spot, personal search of accused was conducted, mobile phones were seized. A detail panchanama was drawn. A report is prepared and submitted before the SHO., which is the basis to register the case against the accused in Cr.No.99/2022 for the offence punishable U/s.20(B) of NDPS Act. Accused were arrested and produced before the court. The present petitioner is accused No.2 in the case. CCH-33 Crl.Misc.No.7914/2022
8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner
that he was planted in the case by the complainant police he is unaware of seized drug. The seized article is not commercial quantity. The mandatory provisions of Sec.41, 42, 50, 52 and 47 of the Act are not complied. he is permanent residents of the address given in the cause title. In the event of grant of bail he is ready to abide by the conditions which are being imposed by this court.
9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioner is
committed heinous offence 8 Kgs., 190 grams of ganja is seized from the petitioner and other accused. The offence punishable with imprisonment upto 20 years and with fine. There are primafacie material available against him.
10. On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on 27.7.2022 apprehended the petitioner herein. On looking to the seizure panchanama the drugs seized is weighing 8 Kgs., 190 grams of ganja. As per specification of small and commercial quantity of narcotic drug or psychotropic substance issued by Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Notification S.O.1055(E) dated 19.10.2001 at Sl.No.55 the narcotic drugganja 1000 grams is small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial quantity. In this case the quantum of ganja seized is 8 Kgs., 190 grams is a intermediary 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. Here in this case the drugs seized by the
investigating agency to the tune of 8 Kgs., 190 grams of ganja which is an intermediate quantity. When the quantity is less than commercial quantity, rigors of Sec.37 of the CCH-33 Crl.Misc.No.7914/2022 NDPS Act will not attract, and factors become similar to bail petitions under regular statues normal, unless the prosecution points towards exceptional circumstances.
12. The major portion of investigation in the case is
concluded as the incriminatory article is already seized from accused. The offence alleged against the petitioner is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Further custodial interrogation is not warranted. His Voluntary statement is already recorded. As per the information provided by the petitioner he is permanently residing in the address shown in the cause title. The apprehension of the prosecution that he 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.
12. Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass
following:
ORDER
The Petition filed by the petitioner U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum with following conditions.
1. The petitioner 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. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this court without prior permission.
3. He shall not tamper the witness or abscond.
4. He shall co-operate with I.O for investigation.
5. He shall not commit similar offence or any offence while on bail.
6. He shall furnish his photo ID proof and photo ID proof of his sureties.
7. He shall appear before the court on all hearing dates.
8. Breach of any of the conditions by the petitioner would entail cancellation of bail.
[Dictated to the Judgment Writer, directly on the computer, typed and computerised by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 12th day of August 2022] (B. S. JAYASHREE) XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE, (NDPS) : BENGALURU. CN/*