High CourtsSingle Bench

Mohammed Ashik vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 31 March 2022 · Citation: (2022) 03 KL CK 0280

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P., J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, — Section 20(b)(ii)(A), 22(b), 29, 60(3)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1718 Of 2022
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

12 paragraphs · 473 words

Gopinath P, J

1.

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.5/2022 of Pathanapuram Excise Range Office, Kollam District alleging commission of offences under Sections 20 (b) (ii)(A), 22 (b), 29 and 60 (3) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

2.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with the other accused in the case was found in possession of 2 grams of MDMA and 20 grams of gunja. It is alleged that the 1st accused in the case had brought the contraband articles for the 2nd accused from Malappuram.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter and has been falsely implicated. It is submitted that there is no recovery of any contraband from the possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and his continued detention is not necessary for the purpose of any investigation. It is submitted the the petitioner has been in custody for 46 days.

4.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. It is submitted that the petitioner was very much was present when the excise party had recovered the contraband. It is submitted that the petitioner is clearly involved in the matter and cannot escape from the liability by stating that there is no recovery of contraband from his possession and the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. It is submitted that if the petitioner is granted bail there is every likelihood of similar offences will be repeated in future.

5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations and taking into account the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for 46 days and also taking into account the fact that no criminal antecedents are reported, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted bail subject to conditions.

In the result this bail application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of 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 in Crime No.5/2022 of Pathanapuram Excise Range Office on every Saturday at 11 a.m until further orders;

(iii) The petitioner shall not interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.5/2022 of Pathanapuram Excise Range Office;

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating officer in Crime No.5/2022 of Pathanapuram Excise Range Office may file an application before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.