Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3581 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTBail Appl. 8278/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER: KHAIS AGED 28 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED, ASSAINARUPURAKKAL HOUSE, KUTTAYI P.O., MANGALAM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676562 BY ADVS. RAMEEZ NOOH P.RAFTHAS RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673011 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
OTHER PRESENT: PP - SUNILKUMAR KURIAKOSE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B. A. No.3581 of 2023 :2:
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
B. A. No.3581 of 2023 Dated this the 4th day of July, 2023
ORDER
This is an application for regular bail.
2. Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 11 of 2021 of Excise Range Office, Tirur, registered alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(i)C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
3. The prosecution case is that, based on the information
received, the Excise Circle Inspector, Tirur conducted a search in the 2nd room at the 1st floor of the building belonging to one Rafeeq, Mudikkal house, Alungal desom and seized 40.5 kgs of ganja by preparing a mahazar. On getting information from the said Rafeeq that the said room was taken on rent by one Navas on 15.5.2021, the above said crime got registered against him for the above said offences.
4. Petitioner submits that he was arrested on 07.05.2022 and
that he was made an accused on the basis of the confession statement that one Subeesh had transferred a sum of Rs.50,000/- to his account through the account of another person in connection B. A. No.3581 of 2023 :3:
with the offence alleged. Though the petitioner moved an application for bail before the Special Court for NDPS Act cases, Manjeri, the same was rejected. Applications for bail filed before this court were rejected as per Annexure A1 to A3 orders. He further submits that the investigation is over and charges has been filed.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for bail
mainly contending that 40.5 kgs of ganja was seized from the possession of the 1st accused. The statement of the 1st accused revealed that it was the petitioner who has given the contraband to the 1st accused and it is further revealed that on verification of the call records, it is found that the petitioner had constant contact with the 1st accused and by verifying the tower location, both of them were found nearby the building in which the contraband was kept. It is also submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that an amount of Rs.49,000/- was transferred by the 1 st accused to the account of the petitioner and the same was revealed on verification of the bank account details. It is also submitted by the Public
Prosecutor that towards commission, Rs.50,000/- was also transferred to the account of the petitioner through the account of one Subeesh and based on this, learned Public Prosecutor B. A. No.3581 of 2023 :4:
submitted that petitioner had an active role in the commission of alleged offence. Learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions further submitted that the petitioner is involved in various other criminal cases of Tirur Police Station, ie., Crime Nos.349 of 2018, 334 of 2018, 351 of 2018, 1327 of 2021, 42 of 2020 and 961 of 2020 and also in an NDPS crime No.12 of 2021 of Kuttippuram Excise Range Office.
Admittedly, it is a case where commercial quantity of ganja was
seized and therefore, the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will come into play. Petitioner could not substantiate with valid reasons that the twin condition in Section 37 are satisfied in this case. In view of the same, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, there will be a direction to the trial court to expedite the trial of the case. If there is undue delay in the completion of the trial, the petitioner will be free to move this Court or the trial court concerned seeking bail.
Sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE sm/