High CourtsSingle Bench

Basil Abraham vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 26 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 KL CK 0248

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 8(C), 22(C), 27A, 29, 37
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 4763 OFf2023
Ask AI about this case

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

16 paragraphs · 511 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

This is an application for regular bail filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

2.

Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No. 241 of 2023 of Angamaly Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under sections 8(C), 22(C) and 27A r/w Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3.

According to the prosecution, on 26-03-2023, accused 1 and 2 were found transporting 20.110 grams of MDMA in a tourist bus and the 3rd accused is alleged to have financed and arranged the contraband and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that petitioner was arrested on 26-04-2023 and that the quantity of contraband when subjected to analysis revealed to be Methamphetamine hydrochloride. It was further submitted that in view of the change in the nature of contraband, the offence has been altered to 22(b) since the quantity is less than the commercial, and the petitioner ought to be released on bail.

5.

Sri.P.G.Manu, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and submitted that the allegations are serious and that even though the contraband has been found to be Methamphetamine hydrochloride on analysis, considering the nature of allegations the petitioner ought not to be released on bail.

6.

I have considered the rival contentions.

7.

Though the contraband siezed was initially assumed to be MDMA, on analysis, it has been found to be Methamphetamine hydrochloride. The quantity siezed was 20.110 grams. In view of the nature of contraband siezed, on analyses having been found to be Methamphetamine hydrochloride, the quantity comes to less than commercial and the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not apply.

8.

Petitioner was arrested on 26-04-2023 and has been in custody since then. He is a young man 24 years of age. Considering the nature of the allegations and the period of detention already undergone, I am of the view that the petitioner can be released on bail under strict conditions.

8.

In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.

(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.