Blog

BAIL APPLN. 2064/2022

PAWAN ARORA vs STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

The petitioner sought for regular bail in FIR No.78/2020 under sections 22/25/29 NDPS Act and section 62 Drugs & Cosmetics Act registered at PS Crime Branch. The petitioner has been in custody since 4th August, 2020 and charges have already been framed by the Ld. Trial Court. Petition before the HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL.

THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES, ACT, 1985

Section 22	Punishment for contravention in relation to psychotropic substances.
Section 25	Punishment for allowing premises, etc., to be used for commission of an offence.
Section 29	Punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy

FACTS OF THE CASE

On the basis of a secret information, a raid was conducted in the jhuggis of Kamla Nehru Camp, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi on the night of 17th and 18th June, 2020 by the Narcotic Cell, Crime Branch.

At the instance of Sharvan Kumar, a huge consignment of psychotropic substance Tramadol, Nitrazepam based tablets and Codeine based syrups were recovered from the godown. During enquiry, he revealed that the medicines of the godown belonged to the petitioner and his manager Chander Shekhar.

The FIR was accordingly registered and the caretaker of the godown (Sharvan Kumar) was arrested. As per his disclosure, the petitioner and his manager had their office at A-69, DSIDC, Packaging Complex, Second Floor, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi and they had taken the empty room in his jhuggi for using it as a godown for storing medicines on a monthly rent of Rs.7,500/- and also engaged his carrier vehicle for bringing medicines from other suppliers and to transport them to customers.

The petitioner was arrested from Haridwar on 5th August, 2020 and Chander Shekhar was also arrested on 7th August, 2020.

The licence to sell, possess and deal in wholesale medicines at Kirti Nagar address was in the possession of Chander Shekhar who was the proprietor of M/s Rudra Thakur Enterprises.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had not been charged under section 25 NDPS Act and therefore, could not be considered as an owner or occupier of the said premises.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner stressed that the charge sheet records given by the  prosecution has verified licence No.DL-MTN-130647 which is in the name of M/s. Rudra Thakur Enterprises issued by the Dy. Director Control Department, Karkardooma, Delhi.

The Council contended that there existed a valid license which was available in favor of M/s. Rudra Thakur Enterprises with the address as A-69, DSIDC, Packaging Complex, Second Floor, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. A self-declaration had also been signed by Chander Shekhar and Clause 10 of the said declaration noted that as per Rule 65 (3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, sale record shall be kept on cash-credit memo. It was also submitted that as per an RTI which was moved by the petitioner, the Drugs Control Department responded on 25th May, 2021 and verified that M/s. Rudra Thakur Enterprises under the licence could deal with drugs specified under Form 20B and 21B which also includes Tramadol, Nitrazepam, Phosphate and Codeine. These were subject to compliance of the conditions.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that at the best thr petitioner could have been charged with section 26 (Punishment for certain acts by licensee or his servants) NDPS Act since he was an employee of the firm which had the license.

Learned APP for the State contended that as per the FSL report it has been confirmed that the seized material was psychotropic substances and that pursuant to framing of charges, the case was at the stage of prosecution evidence and trial was progressing. Further, it was contended that the contraband seized was of commercial quantity and therefore attracts the bar of section 37 (Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable) NDPS Act.

JUDGEMENT

The Court found it evident that the license of M/s. Rudra Thakur Enterprises had been verified and is in the name of Chander Shekher who is in judicial custody. 

This Court was of the view that at the current stage the trial would consume substantial time and 37 witnesses have to be examined and all documents which are relevant to the prosecution are already in their custody. Thus allowing the petitioner be released on regular bail.

The petitioner was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Ld. Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:

• Petitioner should not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.
• Petitioner should provide permanent address to the Ld. Trial Court. The petitioner will have to intimate the Court by way of an affidavit and to the IO regarding any change in residential address.
• Petitioner is required to appear before the Court as and when the matter is taken up for hearing.
• Petitioner should join investigation as and when called by the IO concerned.
• Petitioner is required to provide all mobile numbers to the IO concerned which shall be kept in working condition at all times and shall not switch off or change the mobile number without prior intimation to the IO concerned. The mobile location must be kept on at all times.
• Petitioner should not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not communicate with or come in contact with any of the prosecution witnesses, the complainant/victim or any member of the complainant/victim’s family or tamper with the evidence of the case. 

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY ADITYA G S.

Click here to view your judgement