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 25 th DAY OF JULY 2022
Crl. Misc.No.6977/2022
petitioners : 1. Akash Chakri, S/o.Mahadeva (accused No.2 to 4) Chakri, 23 years, R/at.7th cross, R&T Layout, Thanisandra, Bangalore 77.
2. Mohammed Tabreq, S/o.Mohammed Ambur, 27 years, R/at. No.7, I Cross, Modi Garden, JC Nagar, Bangalor 06.
3. Asadulla, S/o.Rahamathulla, 23 years, Shampura, Bangalore 560
045.
(By Sri.NSM., Adv.)
V/S.
Respondent : State of Karnataka by KG Halli PS
(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.242/2022 for the offences punishable U/Sec.399, 402 IPC., Sec.25(1) (B) of Arms Act and Sec. 21(B), 8(c) of N.D.P.S. Act.
2. The prevalent grounds urged seeking bail:-
That the petitioners are 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. 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. The quantity seized from the possession of the petitioners is less than commercial quantity. The petitioners 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 13 grams of MDMA which is a commercial quantity is recovered from accused No.1 and from other accused deadly weapons like dragger/talvar, iron long and a dragger were recovered. There are sufficient material available against the petitioners, and the said offences are punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 10 years which may 3 CCH-33 Crl.Misc.6977/2022 extend to 20 years and shall also be liable to fine. The investigation is pending. In the event of his release he may tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Incriminatory articles were seized from his custody. He may involve himself in similar offences. Investigating agency by complying the provisions prevailed under the act has seized the contraband from the petitioners. The petitioners herein would sell the drugs to the younger generation which may ruin the career of younger generation. With these specific pleas sought to reject the bail plea of the petitioners.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the prosecution.
5. The points that arise for my consideration are as here under:
1. Whether petitioners 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 Negative Point No.2: As per the final order for the following:
REASONS
7. POINT NO.1:- The PSI of K G Halli PS., has put the criminal law into motion. The gist of the allegation reads as here under:-
On 7.7.2022 at about 7:30 p.m., when the complainant was in the station he has received credible
information that 5 unknown persons in three bikes are gathered in front of Santhe Midana gate in
Kacharakanahalli with an intention to commit some illegal acts by holding deadly weapons in their hands. After receiving the information he has informed to his superior officer obtained permission and he along with panchas and staff went to the spot and apprehended 4 persons. One person escaped from the spot. On enquiry they revealed their names and addresses. On personal search of accused No.1 they seized 13 grams of MDMA, from accused No.2, 26 inches and 1.5 inch wide dragger/talvar recovered, from accused No.3 one iron long and from accused No.4 one dragger was recovered. A detail mahazar is drawn, the accused No 1 to 4 were arrested. A detail report is prepared submitted before SHO. The said report is the basis to register the case against accused Nos.1 to 5 in crime 5 CCH-33 Crl.Misc.6977/2022 No.242/2022 for the offences punishable under Sec.399, 402 IPC., Sec.25(1)(B) of Arms Act and Sec. 21(B), 8(c) of N.D.P.S. Act. The petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 4 in the case.
8. The learned counsel for petitioners argued that the investigating agency has not followed proper procedure while conducting raid. They are innocent and falsely implanted in the case. They are in no way connected to the crime. In the event of grant of bail they are ready to offer solvent sureties for their due appearance before the court. 9. The prosecution contends that 13 grams of MDMA seized from the accused No.1 and the present petitioners were in the company of accused No.1 at the time of apprehension. The petitioners were arrested with deadly weapons having intention to commit dacoity. In the event of their release they may abscond and may repeat the crime and there is every possibility of absconding of the petitioners. The offences alleged against them are heinous in nature. The petitioners are not entitled for bail.
10. On looking to the prosecution papers the petitioners herein were armed with deadly weapons. Further they have assembled there to commit dacoity. Deadly weapons were seized from their possession. Accused No1 is in possession of 13 grams of MDMA. 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.134 the narcotic drug – MDMA weighing 10 grams is a commercial quantity. As per the investigation report the present petitioners in connivance with accused No.1 have planned to commit dacoity to satisfy their financial needs. The accused No.1 is a rowdy sheeter as against him there are several cases pending different police station . The present petitioners have connived with accused No.1 to commit dacoity. They have also planned to commit gang war, they were armed with deadly weapons.
11. The NDPS Act provides deterrent punishment for various offences relating to illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. In the dictum of 7 CCH-33 Crl.Misc.6977/2022 Babua Vs., state of Orissa reported in 2001(2)SCC 566 the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that:
“3. In view of Section 37(1)(b) of the Act unless there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioners are not guilty of such offence and that they are not likely to commit any offence while on bail alone will entitle them to a bail. In the present case, the petitioners attempted to secure bail on various grounds but failed. But those reasons would be insignificant if we bear in mind the scope of Section 37(1)(b) of the Act. At this stage of the case all that could be seen is whether the statements made on behalf of the prosecution witnesses, if believable, would result in conviction of the petitioners or not. At this juncture, we cannot say that the petitioners are not guilty of the offence if the allegations made in the charge are established. Nor can we say that the evidence having not been completely adduced before the Court that there are no grounds to hold that they are not guilty of such offence. The other aspect to be borne in mind is that the liberty of a citizen has got to be balanced with the interest of the society. In cases where narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances are involved, the petitioners would indulge in activities which are lethal to the society. Therefore, it would certainly be in the interest of the society to keep such persons behind bars during the pendency of the proceedings before the court, and the validity of Section 37(1)(b) having been upheld, we cannot take any other view.”
As per the enunciation of law in the afore said dictums it is clear that no person shall be granted bail unless the two conditions are satisfied, i.e., the satisfaction of the court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioners are not guilty and that they are not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Here in the present case the petitioners were apprehended and 13 grams of MDMA was seized from the possession of accused No.1 and from the petitioners herein deadly weapons were seized. The quantity of the contraband is commercial quantity. The petitioners herein have assembled there to commit dacoity. There are primafacie materials available against the petitioners attracting the allegations leveled in the prosecution papers. In the result, I proceed to hold that the petitioners herein have not made out any grounds to entertain their plea for bail. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the negative. 12. Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER 9 CCH-33 Crl.Misc.6977/2022
The petition filed by the petitioners U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C is hereby rejected.
[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 25th day of July 2022]
(B. S. JAYASHREE) XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE, (NDPS) : BENGALURU. CN/*