Athul A vs State Of Kerala

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.

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 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.

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

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 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.