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 27 th DAY OF JUNE 2022
Crl.Misc.No.5995/2022
Petitioner :
(accused No.1 )
Ananda, S/o Muninanjanappa, aged
about 45 years, Resident of
Aruvanahalli Village, Kundana hobli,
devanahalli taluk, Bengaluru District.
(By Sri VR Adv.)
V/S.

Respondent :
State by Vishwanathapura PS
(By Public Prosecutor)
OR D E R
The present petition U/Sec.438 of Cr.P.C., is filed by
the petitioner to enlarge him on bail in the event of his
arrest in Cr.No.75/2022 of Vishwanathapura PS., registered
for the offence punishable U/Sec.20(a) of NDPS Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioner for grant of bail
are as under:
2
That the petitioner is very innocent and law abiding
citizen. He has not committed any offence much less the
offence as alleged.

He has no knowledge of alleged crime
and falsely implanted at the instance of extraneous
elements.

Complainant
has
shown
this
petitioner
as
accused in the aforesaid crime. Though the alleged offence
is
non
bailable,
but
is
neither
punishable
with
imprisonment for life or death sentence. 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. He has no bad
antecedents.

He is the sole bread earner of his family.

Hence, sought to grant bail.

3. The objection raised by the prosecution is that the
investigating agency has in all seized 2 Kgs., 270 grams of
ganja plant which was grown beside the house of the
accused.

The accused is found to be in possession of
narcotic substance.
spot.
against
A detailed mahazar is drawn in the
Personal search is conducted. The offence alleged
the
petitioner
is
punishable
with
rigorous
imprisonment for a term which shall extend upto 10 years.

CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.5995/2022
3
There is a primafacie case available against the petitioner.
He is an habitual drug dealer.

In the event of grant of bail,
he would abscond and may hamper the investigation.
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:- A report submitted by PSI., who is the
complainant in this case before the Vishwanthapura PS.
The contents of the report is as here under:On 10.06.2022 at about 12:05 AM., when the
complainant was in the station he has received credible
4
information that one Anand, S/o.Muni Anjanappa, resident
of Aruvanahalli village, Kundana hobli, Devanahalli Taluk
has illegally grown the cannabis plant beside his house. He
has informed the Higher Officer and obtained permission to
conduct raid. He along with his staff and panchas went to
the spot and saw one ganja plant grown near the house of
the accused by covering it with plastic bag on both sides.
On seeing them the accused who was present at the spot
ran away.

They uprooted the plant and on weighing the
same it was 2 Kgs., 270 grams. Thereafter, a detail seizure
panchanama was drawn. A detail report was prepared and
submitted before SHO which is the basis to register the case
against the accused in Cr.No.75/2022 of Vishwanathapura
PS registered for the offence punishable U/Sec.20(B) of
NDPS Act. The present petitioner is the accused in the case.
He is not arrested.

8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioner
that he is planted in the case by the complainant police he
is unaware of seized drug. The seized article is not
commercial quantity.

He is permanent resident of the
address given in the cause title. In the event of grant of bail
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.5995/2022
5
he is ready to abide by the conditions which are being
imposed by this court.

9.

The prosecution opposed the bail plea on the
ground that the offence alleged against the petitioner is
punishable upto 10 years.

There are sufficient materials
available against the petitioner attracting 20(B) of the Act.
He is required for investigation in the case.

10. On collective scrutiny of the rival contentions, the
allegation against the present petitioner is that he has
grown ganja plant near his house. The investigating agency
has conducted raid and seixed ganja plant which is
weighing 2 Kgs., 270 grams.

At this stage, there is no
material collected by the investigating agency that the
accused is the owner of the house where the alleged ganja
plant is grown.

The investigation is in progress.

incriminatory article is already seized.

The
The custodial
interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted. Further as
per notification of small and commercial quantity of narcotic
drug or psychotropic substance issued by Ministry of
Finance Department of Revenue Notification S.O.1055(E)
6
dated 19.10.2001 at Sl.No.55 the narcotic drugнganja 1000
grams is small quantity and 20 Kgs., is commercial
quantity. In this case the quantum of ganja plant seized is
2 Kgs 270 grams which is an intermediate quantity.

11.

The petitioner herein is not having previous
criminal antecedents. 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.438 of Cr.P.C is hereby allowed.
The respondent police is directed to release
the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in
Cr.No.75/2022 of Vishwanathapura Police Station
for the offences punishable U/s.20(a) of NDPS
7
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.5995/2022
Act, on executing personal bond for a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the like sum
with following conditions:н
1)
He shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat or promise to any
person acquainted with facts of the case,
so as to dissuade him from disclosing
such facts to the Court or to any police
officer.

2)
He shall mark his attendance before the
concerned IO on every first Sunday of the
month between 10.00 am., to 5.00 pm., till
filing of the charge sheet or further orders
which ever is earlier.

3)
He shall attend before the Court on all
dates of hearing without fail and shall not
leave the jurisdiction of this court till the
conclusion
of
trial
without
prior
permission of this court.

4)
He shall not threaten or try to tamper with
the prosecution witnesses in any
manner.

5)
He shall not commit similar offence or
any offence while on bail.

6)
He shall furnish his photo ID proof and
photo identity proof of their surety.

8
7)
Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioner 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 27th day of June 2022]
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*