Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 7TH MAGHA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 8860 OF 2021 CRIME NO.1616/2021 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: ABDUL RASHEED, AGED 39 YEARS S/O ALIHAJI, KOKKARATH VALAPPIL HOUSE, KADAVALLUR DESPOM, KUNNAMKULAM,THRISSUR DISTRICT BY ADVS. T.P.SAJID K.P.MOHAMED SHAFI SHIFA LATHEEF NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT. SMT. SEETHA .S. (SR.PP) THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: GOPINATH.P, J ---------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2022
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1616/2021 of Kuynnamkulam Police Station, Thrissur District alleging commission of offences under Section 27 of Arms Act, Section 55(1) of Kerala Abkari Act, Section 118(i) of K.P.Act and Sections 22(b),22(c),20(b) (ii)B and 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 06.08.2021,
the petitioner was found in possession of 3.1687 Kg of ganja, 5.2 grams of MDMA, 25.500 litres of Indian Made Foregin Liquor, 450 small packets of Hans, two swords and one knife. On the subsequent day, the accused Nos.2 and 3 were arrested having in their possession 22.12 grmas of MDMA and 15.55 grams of ganja. The allegation against the petitioner and the other accused is that they are drug dealers and peddlers in the area from they were arrested.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the drugs recovered from the possession of the petitioner is admittedly not in commercial quantity and therefore, the rigour of Section 37 may not
be applied for petitioner/1st accused. It is submitted that the petitioner has been arrested on 06.08.2021 and has completed 174 days in custody. It is submitted that the custody of the petitioner is no longer required for the purposes of any investigation and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant of
bail. It is submitted that the recovery from the petitioner and accused Nos. 2 and 3 cannot be treated separately for the purposes of determining whether the drugs in their possession were commercial quantity or not. It is submitted that there is clear evidence to show that the petitioner and the other accused in the case were part of one
gang, who are dealing with drugs in their area. It is submitted that there are two antecedents reported against the petitioner as Crime Nos.1615/2021 and 1617/2021, both of Kunnamkulam Police Station where again the petitioner is accused of offences against the NDPS Act.
5. Taking into consideration the submissions of the learned
Public Prosecutor, I am of the opinion that for the purposes of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the quantities of drugs recovered from the petitioner and accused Nos.2 and 3 cannot be treated separately to determine whether the drugs were in commercial quantity or not. That apart, there are two other earlier cases registered against the
petitioner where similar offences are alleged against him. The petitioner is therefore not entitled to bail going by the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that he is not guilty of the offences alleged against him.
6. In the result, this bail application will stands dismissed. Sd/-GOPINATH.P JUDGE lsn