Amiruddin Ali vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the sole accused in Crime No.458/2024 of the Ernakulam Town North Police Station, Ernakulam registered against him for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 22(b) and 20(B)(II)A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘the Act’). The petitioner was arrested on 02.04.2024.

The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 02.04.2024, at around 18.05 hours, the accused was found in possession of 2.55 grams of MDMA and 147 grams of ganja. The accused was arrested on the spot with the contraband article. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri.Luke J. Chirayil, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations leveled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no material to substantiate the involvement of the petitioner in the crime. In any given case, the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 70 days, the investigation in the case is practically complete, and recovery has been effected. Moreover, the contraband involved in the case is of an intermediate quantity. Hence, the application may be allowed.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the investigation in the case is in progress. She also submitted that if the petitioner is let off on bail, there is every likelihood of him committing a similar offence. The Investigating Officer has filed a bail objection report, inter alia, contending that the petitioner has criminal antecedents, since he is involved in another crime for allegedly possessing small quantity of the contraband. The learned Public Prosecutor prayed that the application may be dismissed.

The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that he was found in possession of 2.55 grams of MDMA and 147 grams of ganja. Indisputably, the contraband involved in the case is of an intermediate quantity. The petitioner was arrested on 02.04.2024, which is nearly 70 days, the investigation of the case is practically complete and recovery has been effected.

After bestowing my anxious consideration to the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials placed on record, especially on considering the fact that the contraband allegedly seized from the accused is of an intermediate quantity, that the rigour under Section 37 of the Act does not apply to the facts of the case, that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 70 days, that the investigation in the case is practically complete, and the recovery has been effected, I am of the view that the petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him 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 court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail;

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond;

(v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. (vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below.

(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below.

(vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].