Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 3RD BHADRA, 1945 CRIME NO.40/2023 OF THRISSUR EXCISE RANGE, THRISSUR PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED: SREEKUMAR AGED 22 YEARS S/O VIJAYAKUMAR.B, VATTAPARAMBATH HOUSE,KAIPPILLY ROAD, ARIMBOOR.P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680620 BY ADVS. K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN DEEPA K.RADHAKRISHNAN JISSMON A KURIAKOSE SANAL C.S RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV SMT.S.SEETHA-SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.40/2023 of Thrissur Excise Range, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. The prosecution case is that on 22.07.2023 at 5.45 p.m.,
an inspection was conducted by the Excise Officials, at a place near the residence of the 1st accused. On such inspection, recovery of 136 grams of hashish oil was effected and at the relevant time both the petitioner and the 1st accused was there. The petitioner and the 1st accused were arrested on the same day and since then they have been under judicial detention. This application for regular bail is submitted by the petitioner/ 2nd accused in such circumstances.
3. Heard Sri. K.R.Arun Krishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha S., learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
4. I have carefully gone through the records. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of
all the allegations and it is pointed out that recovery was effected from a place near the house of the 1st accused. There is nothing on record to indicate any connection of the petitioner with the said acticle. Anyhow, it is a matter to be investigated but, the fact remains that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 22.07.2023 and no criminal antecedents of the petitioner were brought to my notice. The quantity involved is not commercial and therefore, rigour under Section 37 of NDPS Act is not applicable. In such circumstances, taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the period of incarceration the petitioner had undergone, I deem it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, this application is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on the following conditions: i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation. iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m on every Wednesday until the filing of final report. iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required. v) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail. vi) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any
of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
vii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the jurisdictional court. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE scs