Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Nahas vs State of Kerala

NAHAS vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 27, 2021
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1603739

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./1866/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

NAHAS

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....karuppaswami who were involved in the business of drug peddling.4. heard both sides and perused the case diary.5. the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and he has been falsely implicatedin the present case. he further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and hence he is entitled to get bail. the learned public prosecutor opposed the bail application. he contended that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioner and if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.6. the petitioner was arrested on 11.09.2020 and sincethen he is in judicial custody. the quantity involved is a commercial quantity. since the quantity involved is a commercial quantity, the jurisdiction of this court to grant bail is circumscribed by the provisions of section 37 of the ndps act. the petitioner moved this court for bail twice on earlier occasions. both those applications were dismissed by this court holding that the rigor of section 37 of the ndps act would apply. no change of circumstances has been pointed out by the petitioner.accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. sd/- dr. kauser edappagath judge np

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 7TH VAISAKHA, 1943 Bail Appl..No.1866 OF 2021 CRIME NO.14/2020 OF ANGAL EXCISE RANGE OFFICE , Kollam PETITIONER/ACCUSED: NAHAS AGED 35 YEARS VALLA KADAVIL, VELLAKINAR ROAD, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688001 BY ADV. SHRI.R.UMASANKAR RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031 2 ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM, PIN-691333 SRI.M.R.DHANIL, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This is an application filed u/s 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.

2. The petitioner is the accused No.2 in Crime No.14/2020 of Anchal Excise Range Office. The offences alleged are under Sections 8(C), 22(C) and 28 of the NDPS Act.

3. The prosecution case in short is that on 13.08.2020 at

about 5.45 p.m., the Excise Circle Inspector of Aryankavu Range seized 36 strips each containing 24 capsules of a narcotic drug named Spasmo-Proxyvon Plus from the 1st accused while he was transporting the same in a vehicle and on further investigations, it was found that the contraband substance was supplied to the 1 st accused by the petitioner and one Karuppaswami who were involved in the business of drug peddling.

4. Heard both sides and perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and he has been falsely implicated

in the present case. He further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and hence he is entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. He contended that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioner and if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.

6. The petitioner was arrested on 11.09.2020 and since

then he is in judicial custody. The quantity involved is a commercial quantity. Since the quantity involved is a commercial quantity, the jurisdiction of this Court to grant bail is circumscribed by the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner moved this Court for bail twice on earlier occasions. Both those applications were dismissed by this Court holding that the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would apply. No change of circumstances has been pointed out by the petitioner.

Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE NP

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial