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 23st DAY OF AUGUST 2022
Crl.Misc.No.8007/2022
Petitioners :
1 Ranjith N.T
S/o. N. T.Pillary,
Aged about 28 years,
R/at. Mankeetti House,
Kuttor Post,
Thiruvalla Taluk,
Kerala 689106.
2 Prasal K.K
S/o.Karathikeyan,
Aged about 23 years,
R/at. Kannattu,
Mithrakary Post,
Alappuzha, Kerala689595
(By Sri Nataraja., Adv.)
V/S.
Respondent :
State by Excise Police K.R. Puram
Range PS
(By Public Prosecutor)
2
ORDER
The present petition U/Sec.439 of Cr.P.C., is filed by
the petitioners to enlarge them on bail, in Cr.No.8/2022 of
Excise Police K.R. Puram
PS., registered for the offences
punishable U/Sec.20(b), 20(b)(ii)(b), 25, 8(c) of N.D.P.S. Act.
2. The grounds urged by the petitioners for grant of
bail are as under:
That the petitioners have never committed or involved
in the alleged crime either directly or indirectly but they
have been falsely implicated in the above case.
The
petitioners submit that the voluntary statements were
drawn by the police at their whims and fancies to suit their
case.
The seizure of ganja from the possession of the
petitioners is concocted to suit the purpose and these
accused are implicated after the date of incident.
No
incriminating articles were recovered after getting the
custody of these accused.
The mandatory provisions
U/s.42(2), 50 and 57 of NDPS Act has not been complied.
The I.O has not mentioned the exact quantity of the alleged
ganja seized from the accused in FIR or in the complaint.
3
CCH33
Crl.Misc.No.8007/2022
Though the alleged offence is non bailable, but is neither
punishable with imprisonment for life or death sentence.
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 objection raised by the prosecution is that the
investigating agency has seized 3 Kgs., 150 grams of ganja
from the possession of petitioners herein.
The petitioners
are found to be in possession of narcotic drug. A detailed
mahazar is drawn in the spot. Personal search is conducted.
The offence alleged against the petitioners is punishable
with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall extend
upto 1 year. There is a primafacie case available against the
petitioners. They are habitual drug dealers.
In the event of
grant of bail, they would abscond and may hamper the
investigation.
petitioners.
Hence, sought to reject the bail plea of
4
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: A report submitted by PSI of K R
Pura, Excise Inspector, who is the complainant in this case.
The contents of the report is as here under:
a) That on 7.08.2022 at about 10.30 pm., when the
complainant was on patrolling duty in the departmental
vehicle bearing No.KA 03 G 1524 from Avalahalli village,
Bidrahalli towards Whitefield to Hoskote road at that time
he has received a credible information that some persons
are transporting narcotic drug in a Blue colour two wheeler
5
CCH33
Crl.Misc.No.8007/2022
CBZ bearing No.UA 07 E 8837 and they would come on
Whitefield to Hoskote road to join Hosakote Katamnallur
cross. On receipt of the information he has informed to his
higher officer, obtained permission and thereafter, he along
with his staff and panchas mounted surveillance at
Hosakote Hatamnallur cross. The said two wheeler came to
the
spot
with
two
unknown
persons
on
it.
They
apprehended the said persons and on enquiry the accused
revealed their names and addresses. They were holding one
plastic cover.
On enquiry they revealed that they are in
possession of ganja.
When the bag containing ganja was
weighed, it is found to be 3 Kgs 150 grams. A detail seizure
panchanama was drawn.
Thereafter, he has
prepared a
detail report which is the basis to register the case against
the accused No.1 and 2 in Cr.No.8/2022 for the offences
punishable U/Sec.20(b), 20(b)(ii)(b), 25, 8(c) of N.D.P.S. Act.
The present petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the case.
8. It is argued by the learned counsel for petitioners
that they have planted in the case by the complainant police
they are unaware of seized drug. 3 Kgs 150 grams of ganja
6
is seized from the possession of the petitioners is a small
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 they are 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 petitioners is
punishable upto 10 years and with fine. Ganja seized from
the possession of petitioners is intermediate quantity.
In
the event of grant of bail they are going to abscond and may
hamper investigation.
10. On careful analysis of rival contentions and the
prosecution papers available on record, the investigating
agency seized 3 kgs 150 grams of ganja under the seizure
panchanama. The petitioners are in judicial custody since
the date of his arrest i.e., from 7.08.2022. On looking to the
seizure panchanama the drugs seized is weighing 3 Kgs 150
grams of ganja.
As per specification of small and
CCH33
Crl.Misc.No.8007/2022
7
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 3 kgs 150 grams of Ganja
which is an intermediate quantity.
11.
The petitioners herein are not having previous
criminal antecedents. They are not habitual offenders. 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.
interrogation is not warranted.
Further
custodial
As per the information
provided by the petitioners they 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,
consideration in the affirmative.
I
answer
the
point
for
8
12. 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
court and photo ID proof of his sureties
7.
They shall appear before the court on all
hearing dates.
not
tamper
cooperate
the
with
witness
I.O
or
for
9
8.
CCH33
Crl.Misc.No.8007/2022
Breach of any of the conditions by the
petitioners, 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 23st day of August, 2022].
(B. S. JAYASHREE)
XXXIII ACC & SJ & SPL.JUDGE,
(NDPS) : BENGALURU.
CN/*