The Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in Bengaluru has granted anticipatory bail to Vijay Kumar V, also known as “Auto Viji,” in a case involving the seizure of a commercial quantity of Ganja and deadly weapons. The order, delivered on September 7, 2022, by Smt. B.S. Jayashree, the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS, emphasizes that the petitioner was not present at the scene of the crime and was implicated solely based on the statements of other accused persons.

The petitioner, a 41-year-old resident of Jayanagar 7th Block, sought protection from arrest under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in connection with Crime Number 04/2022 registered by the Vishveshwarapuram Police Station. The charges include violations of Section 20(B)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and Section 25-1(B)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959.

Background of the Police Raid and Seizure

The case originated on January 18, 2022, when the Vishveshwarapuram Police received credible intelligence regarding four individuals in a Honda City car parked near the Chamarajpet Kote ground. The informants suggested the suspects were in possession of narcotics and were armed with deadly weapons, allegedly waiting for the arrival of rival gang members.

Upon conducting a raid, the police apprehended four individuals (Accused Numbers 1 to 4) inside the vehicle. A thorough search of the car’s trunk revealed two bags containing a total of 20.6 kilograms of Ganja. Additionally, the police recovered a “long” (a traditional deadly weapon) from the back of the car.

Under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the threshold for a “commercial quantity” of Ganja is 20 kilograms. Since the seizure totaled 20.6 kilograms, the accused faced stringent legal provisions that typically make bail extremely difficult to obtain under Section 37 of the Act.

Implication Based on Voluntary Statements

The petitioner, Vijay Kumar, was not present at the time of the raid. His involvement was alleged subsequently by the investigating agency based on the voluntary statements provided by the apprehended suspects. According to the prosecution, the four arrested men identified Vijay Kumar as an associate involved in their drug peddling activities and claimed he was expected to arrive at the spot to assist in the sale of the contraband.

The defense counsel argued that Vijay Kumar is a law-abiding citizen who has been falsely implicated. They highlighted that no recovery of drugs or weapons was made from him directly. Furthermore, the defense pointed out that Accused Numbers 1 through 4, from whom the actual contraband was seized, had already been granted statutory bail by the same court.

Judicial Reasoning and the Principle of Parity

In reviewing the petition, Judge B.S. Jayashree noted several key factors that weighed in favor of the petitioner. Firstly, the court observed that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not warranted since the primary investigation, including the seizure of the Ganja and the weapon, was already complete.

The court also scrutinized the prosecution’s lack of evidence regarding the source of the drugs. The judge noted that the investigating agency had not brought forward any material regarding who supplied the Ganja to the group, nor had they prosecuted the original supplier.

A significant factor in the court’s decision was the principle of parity. Since the primary accused persons—those found in physical possession of the commercial quantity of narcotics—had already been enlarged on bail, the court found it appropriate to extend similar relief to the petitioner, who was only implicated through secondary statements.

Strict Conditions for Anticipatory Bail

The court allowed the petition but imposed several stringent conditions to ensure the petitioner’s cooperation with the ongoing legal process. In the event of his arrest, Vijay Kumar is to be released on a personal bond of 1,00,000 rupees with two sureties of the same amount.

The conditions include:

1. The petitioner must not threaten or induce any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
2. He must mark his attendance at the Vishveshwarapuram Police Station on the first Sunday of every month until the charge sheet is filed.
3. He must attend all court hearing dates without fail and is prohibited from leaving the jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
4. He is strictly prohibited from committing any similar offences while on bail.
5. He must provide valid photo identity proof for himself and his sureties.

The judge warned that any breach of these conditions would lead to the automatic cancellation of the bail. This order highlights the court’s stance on balancing the severity of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, with the rights of individuals implicated solely on the basis of co-accused statements without physical evidence.