drug plant

Petitioner accused of the offences under NDPS Act enlarged on bail by the Court: Karnataka High Court

The criminal petition is filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C (direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest) for the enlargement on bail for the offence punishable under section 8(c)( produce, manufacture, possess, sell, purchase, transport, warehouse, use, consume, import inter-State, export inter-State, import into India, export from India or tranship any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance), 17(a) (where the contravention involves small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both), 21(b)( where the contravention involves quantity, lesser than commercial quantity but greater than small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees)and 22(b)(allows the bail application of a person accused of illegal possession of a psychotropic substance) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘the NDPS Act’ for short) by the petitioner. The petition is allowed by the High court of Karnataka through the learned bench led by the Honourable Mr. Justice H.P. Sandesh in the case of Shriram Bharat vs State of Mandya east police ( criminal appeal no 295/2022) on 20th January 2022.

Learned council, Sri Shrikant Kumar appeared from the side of petitioner and Learned high court government pleader, sri H S Shankar appeared from the side of the respondent.

Brief facts of the case are that on 19th November 2021, a information has been received regarding the petitioner/accused and he was subjected to search and when he found that found 47 grams of hero from the pocket of this petitioner and 15 grams of opium with cover and one mobile and a cash of Rs.2,750/-. Hence, a case has been registered against petitioner and he has been in custody from 19th November 2021.

Arguments presented by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the heroin which was seized from the possession of this petitioner is only an intermittent quantity and this petitioner is in custody from 19th November 2021 and his presence is not required for custodial interrogation and there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. The learned counsel also would submit that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

Arguments presented by the learned High court government pleader appearing on behalf of respondent that the small quantity is 5 grams and seized heroin is 47 grams that is intermittent quantity. Apart from that, opium also seized and even though no criminal antecedents against him and during the course of investigation collected the material and filed the charge-sheet.

After hearing both the counsels and considering the submission made before the Honorable court and considering the records presented before honorable court, the petition is allowed by the court that the petitioner shall be realised on bail on certain grounds such as: The petitioner/accused shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; The petitioner/accused shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses; The petitioner/accused No.2 shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all the future hearing dates, unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause; The petitioner/accused No.2 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission of the Court, till the case registered against him is disposed of; However, it is made it clear that if the petitioner indulges in similar offences in future, the State is having liberty to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.

Click here to read the judgement

Judgement Reviewed by Sugam Anand Mishra


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat