AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
28 paragraphs · 553 wordsShircy V., J
The petitioners have filed this successive application for bail in Crime No.536 of 2021 of Chevayoor police station registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 22(b) and 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act' for short).
They are in custody since 22.8.2021.
The prosecution allegation is that on 20.8.2021 at about 2.00 a.m while the SI of police, Chevayoor police station and his team were engaged in
patrolling duty, intercepted an Innova car bearing Reg.No.KL58 U 246 on suspicion and conducted search of the same. From the car they have seized
44.010 gm of MDMA and 28 Royal 225 Tramadol Hydrochloride tablets, concealed on the back side of the driver seat and thus, they were arrested
and the contraband was seized.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they are undergoing incarceration for the last more than 5 months, though they are totally
innocent of the allegations leveled against them. Hence, this application.
The earlier applications filed by the petitioners were dismissed by this Court by an order 16.12.2021 as it was found that
commercial quantity of contraband was involved. But now, the learned Public Prosecutor has produced the copy of the certificate of the chemical
analysis issued by the Assistant Chemical Examiner after analysis of the contraband seized. From the report forwarded after analysis of the nature of
contraband it is revealed that the contraband seized by the investigating agency is not MDMA but, it is Methamphetamine , a stimulant drug. Tramadol
was also not detected in the tablets. As regards the quantity involved it is less than commercial quantity .It is also to be noted that commercial quantity
of contraband was not seized from the possession of the accused so as to attract the rigor under the Act in the matter of bail .
As the quantity involved is not commercial quantity, the limitations under Section 37 of the NDPS Act in the matter of bail is not attracted. It is also
submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the investigating agency is intending to move the trial court to alter the section on the basis of the
certificate of the chemical analysis received from the Regional Chemical Examiner's Laboratory, Kozhikode.
Therefore, taking into account of the facts and circumstances involved in the case as well the period of detention undergone by them in judicial
custody, I am of the view that they can be released on bail subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like
sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.
(ii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
(iii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise 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.
(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the Jurisdictional Court is at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.
