High CourtsSingle Bench

Irfan vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 4 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 KL CK 0015

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohammed Nias C.P., J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(II)(B), 29
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 7396 Of 2023
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

14 paragraphs · 493 words

Mohammed Nias C.P., J

1.

The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.896/2023 of Sreekaryam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram City, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 20(b) (II) (B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act).

2.

The allegation against the petitioner/fourth accused is that on 22.07.2023, while the detecting officer and parties were conducting patrolling duty and reached Sreekaryam junction, they saw the accused parties standing along an autorickshaw. When the accused persons saw the patrolling party, they tried to move away. But the officers searched the autorickshaw and found the alleged contraband under the driver seat and thereafter allegedly conducted a body search as per NDPS Act upon accused Nos.2 to 4, accordingly found 32 gms of Hashish oil from the pant pocket of the above said accused persons. The petitioner and the other accused were arrested, and the crime was registered.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would say that the petitioner is totally innocent and falsely implicated with ulterior motives. At any rate, he points out that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.07.2023, and continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary.

4.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and pointed out that the petitioner is not entitled to bail.

5.

After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and considering the nature of the offfences committed by the petitioner and the fact that he has been in custody from 22.07.2023 and since there is no apprehension raised by the prosecution that if he released on bail, the petitioner is likely to abscond, I hold that bail can be granted to the petitioner. It is also to be noted that no other criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioner.

Accordingly, this application is allowed, and the petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:-

1.The  petitioner  shall  be  released  on  bail  on 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 jurisdictional Court;

2.One of the sureties should be either of the parents or a close relative.

3.The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. till the final report is laid;

4.The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional court. If the petitioner does not have a passport, he shall execute an affidavit to that effect and file the same before the said court within seven days from the date of his release on bail.

5.The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses;

6.The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the conditions are violated, the court concerned will be empowered to take steps for cancellation of bail as per law.