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.

Athul a vs State of Kerala

Athul a vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Feb 26, 2021
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1605099

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./1714/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Athul a

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....reliable is a matter to be considered by the trial court. hence the learned public prosecutor vehemently opposes the application for bail.4. heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned public prosecutor.5. the learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitsthat the applicant has no criminal antecedents. he is only 25 years old and the allegations against him for having financed the transportation of the contraband articles is absolutely untrue and therefore he seeks bail. the final report has already been filed. after having heard the submissions made on both sides, i find that the activities alleged against the applicant would squarely come within the purview of sections 25 and 27 of the ndps act and therefore, the embargo under section 37 (1) (b)(ii) of the ndps act is squarely applicable to the case in hand. the applicant is therefore not entitled to bail because the twine conditions required under section 37 of ndps act are notbail appl..no.1714 of 2021 4 satisfied. there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty and there is also no grounds to believe that he will not be involved in offences of similar nature. hence the application is dismissed with a direction to the trial court to expedite trial in this case. sd/- ashok menon judge rmm

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942 Bail Appl..No.1714 OF 2021 CRIME NO.645/2020 OF KADUTHURUTHY POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/S: ATHUL A AGED 25 YEARS KRISHNAVILASAM HOUSE,MADATHIL KARANAMA KARA,OCHIRA,KOLLAM BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.

RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SMT.V.SREEJA -PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Bail Appl..No.1714 OF 2021 2

O R D E R

Dated this the 26th day of February 2021 Application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is the 5th accused in SC No.105/2020 pending trial on the files of the Special Court for NDPS Act cases, Thodupuzha for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 20(b) (ii) C, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17.06.2020 at

about 5 p.m., the police party allegedly intercepted a lorry bearing registration No.KL 05 AM 4788 while the lorry was engaged in transporting 59.5 kgs of ganja. Accused Nos.1 and 2 who were involved in transporting of ganja were immediately arrested and remanded to judicial custody. On the basis of the their statements and on the materials allegedly collected by the prosecution, the applicant was implicated as the 5th accused and

it is alleged that he was the person who financed. There is evidence to the effect that he has transferred Rs.50,000/- to A1 and through his friend's account he transferred another Bail Appl..No.1714 OF 2021 3 Rs.50,000/- to A1. Moreover, there are call detail records, which indicate that he has been constantly contacting A1 over the phone and giving instructions for the transporting of the contraband articles. Whether those materials are valid and reliable is a matter to be considered by the trial court. Hence the learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the application for bail.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits

that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is only 25 years old and the allegations against him for having financed the transportation of the contraband articles is absolutely untrue and therefore he seeks bail. The final report has already been filed. After having heard the submissions made on both sides, I find that the activities alleged against the applicant would squarely come within the purview of Sections 25 and 27 of the NDPS Act and therefore, the embargo under Section 37 (1) (b)

(ii) of the NDPS Act is squarely applicable to the case in hand. The applicant is therefore not entitled to bail because the twine conditions required under Section 37 of NDPS Act are not

Bail Appl..No.1714 OF 2021 4 satisfied. There are no reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty and there is also no grounds to believe that he will not be involved in offences of similar nature. Hence the application is dismissed with a direction to the trial court to expedite trial in this case. Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE rmm

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial