Anand vs State Of Kerala

A. Badharudeen, J

This is the second application for regular bail filed by the 2nd accused in Crime No.273/2023 of Kottarakkara Police Station, where the prosecution alleges commission of offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (`NDPS Act’ for short hereinafter).

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary as such.

The prosecution allegations is that based on a secret information received to the effect that a youngster had been travelling along with MDMA in an A.C bus coming from Bangalore, when search was conducted, it was found that a youngster was carrying 2 bags, in front of Dhana Boutique on the eastern side of Plakkottu Castle building, on the opposite side of Kottarakkara private bus stand. On seeing the excise party, the petitioner attempted to escape. Thereafter, he was intercepted and, on search, 106 gram of MDMA was seized from his possession. Accordingly, crime was registered alleging commission of the above offence. Later, investigation revealed that the 1st accused along with the petitioner herein purchased MDMA from Bangalore on 26.01.2023 along with Vishnu and Anand and they used to share the profit out of the said business. Further investigation revealed that the 2nd and 3rd accused entrusted Rs.90,000/- to the 1st accused for the purchase of contraband. Further when search was conducted, an yellow plastic cover, 3 ball shaped packets to store MDMA tied with masking tape, were seized from the petitioner’s custody.

Whereas, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the statement given by the 1st accused and also from the materials collected during investigation it has been revealed that the 1st accused purchased MDMA by using the money given by the 2nd and 3rd accused; the 1st accused was arrested while carrying the contraband, jointly purchased by the 2nd and 3rd accused when he was transporting the same and the details of call records between the petitioner and the other accused during the relevant period, to substantiate the involvement of the petitioner in this crime.

This Court dismissed the first bail application considering the fact that on perusal of the case diary, it was revealed that initially contraband to the tune of 106 gram of MDMA was seized from the possession of the 1st accused and later investigation revealed that the 1st accused purchased MDMA by using the money handed over by the 2nd and 3rd accused and there are consistent calls in between the 1st accused, 2nd accused and 3rd accused during the relevant period. Further, investigation in this crime was at the very initial stage and details were to be obtained by the Investigating Officer. Further in cases involving commercial quantity of contraband this Court cannot grant regular bail to the petitioner without satisfying the conditions as provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

In this second application for regular bail, nothing substantiated to take a different view, since the earlier bail application was dismissed holding that the rider under Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot be diluted.

Therefore, this bail application stands dismissed.