The Petitioner was caught in the act of concealing the controlled substances in one room of his residence, where the Police reached and also considering that the quantity seized is a commercial quantity viz. 64 packets of Spasmodon capsules; another 13 packets of Spasmodon capsules and 26 packets of Nitrosun-10 tablets. In the Hon’ble High Court of Sikkim led through the single-bench by Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai in the matters of Durga Gupta @Golu v. State Of Sikkim[BAIL APPLN./11/2021]
The facts of the case are the Applicant herein, aged about 38 years, was arrested under Sections 9 (1)(c) of the Sikkim Anti-Drugs Act, 2006 (SADA, 2006) and Sections 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act, 1985) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Since then he has been in Judicial Custody.
The Petitioners submitted that, the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant matter by his elder brother, one Krishna Gupta, in connivance with the Police party conducting the search and seizure due to the acrimonious relations that he has with his elder brother. That, in fact, the premises that the Petitioner is residing in is the Fifth Floor of the seven storeyed building, whereas the controlled substances were recovered from the Sixth Floor of the building which is the residential premises of his elder brother and his family. That, neither the FIR nor the Seizure Memo reflect the seizure as having been made from his residential premises. That, the elder brother of the Petitioner runs a Medical Store and has a Licence for procuring medicines and therefore collected the controlled substances and with the assistance of the Police and one Yesar Arfat, implicated him falsely in the instant matter. That, the Petitioner was also threatened by the Police at the Sadar Police Station that he would be incarcerated for a long time on account of the various Complaints lodged by his elder brother before the Police Station. Besides, he has no criminal antecedents and being the only bread winner of his family, his incarceration would adversely affect his family.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the Petitioner has been taking advantage of his License to run a Medical Store and has been obtaining medicines that are not permitted by the Licence. That, the Petitioner is not only a consumer of the controlled substances but the investigation has led to the revelation that he is also a supplier and seller of such controlled substances. That, the Petitioner was caught in the act of concealing the controlled substances when the Police reached his residence for search and seizure, hence there is no doubt that the search and seizure were made from his residence, as against the submissions put forth by the Petitioners. Besides, the articles seized were in commercial quantity and hence the Petition for bail deserves to be rejected.
The court concludes “In view of the facts and circumstances placed before me today and in consideration of the fact that at this juncture it has been pointed out that the Petitioner was caught in the act of concealing the controlled substances in one room of his residence, where the Police reached and also considering that the quantity seized is a commercial quantity viz. 64 packets of Spasmodon capsules (total 6400 capsules); another 13 packets of Spasmodon capsules (total 1300 capsules) and 26 packets of Nitrosun-10 tablets (total 2600 tablets), the Petition for bail deserves to be and is accordingly rejected and disposed of.”
The petition is disposed of accordingly.