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
13 paragraphs · 605 wordsMohammed Nias C.P., J
This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking regular bail.
The petitioner is the 4th accused in Crime No. 855/2023 of Tanur Police Station, Malappuram District, for having committed offences punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
The prosecution allegation is that, on 01.08.2023 at 00.08 Hours, the Sub Inspector of Tanur Police Station got secret information that a group of people were selling a Synthetic narcotic drug called MDMA in a red colour Tata Nexon car bearing number KL-65-N-3754 p.m., and after recording the information in the General Diary No.2, prepared a report to the Superior office, the Inspector of Tanur Police station, with SCPO 5231 Sreehareesh, CPO 6600 Libin and DVR CPO 6686 Prasobh proceeded to the site in a Jeep bearing number KL-01- CH-8041 with the investigation kit and reached at the place of incident at 00.15 HRS and found the car. There were five passengers in the car, and seeing the police party, they attempted to escape, and the police party arrested the accused from the site. Thereafter, in the presence of Thirurangadi Police Inspector, a search was conducted on the body of the accused in the presence of independent witnesses at 01.01 Hrs and detected 4.91 grams of MDMA from the custody of 1st accused, 4.46 grams of MDMA from the custody of 2nd accused, 4.25 grams of MDMA from the custody of 3rd accused and 3.63 grams of MDMA from the custody of 4th accused along with other personal properties and thereby committed the offence.
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 01/08/2023, and continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary.
The learned public prosecutor opposed the petition. The learned Public Prosecutor makes available the Chemical Analysis report for perusal, which shows that the contraband seized is Methamphetamine and not MDMA. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that this is a case wherein the 1st accused died while in police custody, and the above case is framed only to save the face of the police and to ward off the allegations against them.
After considering the rival submissions and taking into account the fact that the Chemical Analysis Report shows that the contraband seized is Methamphetamine that too in intermediate quantity, the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 01/08/2023, the allegations made against the police in this case, that the prosecution raises no apprehension that if released on bail the petitioner is likely to abscond, that no other criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioner, I hold that the petitioner can be enlarged on bail.
Accordingly, this application is allowed, and the petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:-
(i) 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;
(ii) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. till the final report is laid;
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses;
(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.
(v) If any of the conditions are violated, the court concerned will be empowered to take steps for cancellation of bail as per law;
