Blog

Mantesh Nevarogi, was charged with Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 after the applicant was confronted on a bus stand with 2.05 kg of ganja which he alleged was less than the commercial quantity, he was with no criminal antecedents. The High Court of Bombay at Goa in a single bench led by Hon’ble Justice Manish Pitale in the matter of Mantesh Nevarogi v. State of Goa [CRMAB/684/2021].

 The facts of the case are that the FIR was registered on 16^th October 2021 after it was alleged that while on patrolling duty when the applicant was confronted on the bus stand, 2.05 KG of Ganja was recovered from him. The applicant had been in custody since the said date, initially, he was in police custody and thereafter he was in judicial custody. Therefore proper judicial process had been followed.

The counsel from the applicant side submitted the application of bail for his client as it was submitted that there were no criminal antecedents of the applicant and he was a resident of Goa, thereby proving that he would be available for trial in any circumstance. It was also pleaded that the applicant undertakes to abide by the conditions that may be imposed for grant of bail by this Hon’ble court. The prosecutor from the government side pleaded that further custody of the applicant was necessary as the investigation was under progress.

The High Court of Bombay at Goa considered the facts of the present and took notice, particularly that the quantity of Ganja allegedly recovered from the applicant was of variable quantity and very much less than the commercial quantity. Thus, does the court was inclined to grant bail by imposing appropriate conditions which were necessary.

The appropriate conditions are Play firstly the applicant shall be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000. Second, the applicant shall attend Fatorda Police Station every Monday between 10 AM to 12 PM noon till the filing of the chargesheet. The applicant has to attend each and every date of proceedings. The applicant shall also cooperate with the investigation and he shall not himself or through any other person indulge in any activity that would tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses. The applicant shall not indulge in any activity which would attract offence similar to the one already registered in the present case.

The Hon’ble Court directed “Needless to say that violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall make the applicant liable for cancellation of bail. It is clarified that merely because the applicant has been granted bail, the concerned Court shall not be influenced during the course of the trial.”

Thus, the bail application was allowed.

Click here to read the judgement.

Judgement reviewed by- Pranav Vyas.