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.6008/2022
petitioners :
(accused No.1 & 2 )
1. Poornachandranath, S/o
Surendranath, aged about 52 years,
R/at No.22, 7th cross, Manjunatha
Layout, Munekolala, Marathahalli,
Bengaluru
Native Address:
Gudikal Village, Kulidapanchayath,
Baleshwara taluk and District.
Odissa 756 030.
2. Sanyasi Goku, s/o Aptopadho
Goku, aged about 47 years, R/at
No.22, 7th cross, Manjunatha
Layout, Munekolala, Marathahalli,
Bengaluru
Native Address
Madhyakol, Owra district, West
Bengal
(By Sri.A.V.N.Adv.
V/S.
Respondent :
State by H.S.R Layout PS.
(By Public Prosecutor)
OR D E R
2
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by
the petitioners to enlarge them on bail, in Cr.No.117/2022
of H.S.R Layout PS., registered for the offence punishable
U/Sec.20(B) of NDPS Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioners for grant of
bail are as under:
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 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. The
petitioners are permanent residents of the address shown 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 bail. 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 the I.O has seized 6 Kgs., 350 grams of
3
ganja.
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6008/2022
The offences alleged against the petitioners are
punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term upto 10
years and shall also be liable to fine. There is a primafacie
case available against the petitioners. They are habitual
drug dealers. There is primafacie case made out against
petitioners. If petitioners are released on bail, they will
continue the profession of narcotic drug selling, and they
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 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
4
7. POINT NO.1:- A report submitted by PSI, ., who is
the complainant in this case before the H.S.R Layout PS.
The contents of the report is as here under:On
09.06.2022
complainant
at
about
1:00
PM.,
when
the
was on patrolling duty he has received
credible information through an informant that on 31 st main
road, 1st Sector, HSR Layout particularly on Thursdays two
anonymous persons used to come there with their travel bag
around 4.30 pm and used to deliver some article to the
customers.
They were arriving to the spot in their two
wheelers. When the informant on suspicion had been to the
spot noticed the left out leaves and seeds of ganja. He has
informed the matter to the complainant PSI. Basing on the
said information a case in Cr.No.117/2022 is registered
against unknown persons alleging commission of offence
punishable U/s.20(B) of NDPS Act. After registration of the
case he has informed the matter to Asst. Commissioner of
Police, Madiwala and the DCP, obtained permission to
conduct raid. He along with panchas and staff had been to
the spot and found the said suspected persons as per the
information provided by the informant.
On enquiry and
search of the said persons, 6 Kgs., 350 grams of ganja was
5
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6008/2022
found. They were apprehended. Their voluntary statements
recorded. It is revealed during interrogation that they are
selling the contraband to the drug edicts and to the public
and they are residents of Orissa and West Bengal.
They
were arrested and produced before the court and were
remanded to judicial custody. The properties seized in the
case were noted in PF No.62/2022.
8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioners
that they are planted in the case by the complainant police
they are 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.
They are
permanent residents of the address given in the cause title.
In the event of grant of bail the are ready to abide by the
conditions which are being imposed by this court.
9. It is argued by the prosecution that the petitioners
have committed heinous offence 6 Kgs., 350 grams of ganja
is seized from the petitioners. The offence punishable with
imprisonment upto 10 years and with fine. There is prima
facie material available against them.
6
10. On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, it is evident that on
09.06.2022 PSI of HSR Layout PS., has conducted raid and
apprehended the petitioners. On looking to the seizure
panchanama the drugs seized is weighing 6 Kgs., 350
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 6 Kgs., 350 grams of ganja
is an intermediate 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.
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6008/2022
7
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
6 Kgs., 350 grams of
ganja which is an intermediate quantity. When the quantity
is less than commercial quantity, rigors of Sec.37 of the
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. The
offence alleged against the petitioners are not punishable
with death or imprisonment for life.
Further custodial
interrogation is not warranted. Their Voluntary statements
is already recorded. As per the information provided by the
petitioners they are permanently residing in the addresses
shown
in
the
cause
title.
The
apprehension
of
the
8
prosecution that they may abscond and may protract the
trial
could
be
conditions.
In
compensated
the
result,
by
I
imposing
answer
the
stringent
point
for
consideration in the affirmative.
13. 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.1,00,000/- each with two sureties 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.
3.
They shall
abscond.
4.
They shall
investigation.
5.
They shall not commit similar offence or
any offence while on bail.
6.
He shall furnish his photo ID proof and
local address proof document before the
not
tamper
co-operate
the
with
witness
I.O
or
for
9
CCH-33
Crl.Misc.No.6008/2022
court and photo ID proof of his sureties
7.
They shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.
8.
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 27th day of June 2022)
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*