Muhammed Anas vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.11/2024 of the Kunnamangalam Excise Range Office, Kozhikode, registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Section 22(c) r/w Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘the Act’). The petitioners were arrested on 27.03.2024.

The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 27.03.2024, the accused were found in conscious possession of 28.03 grams of MDMA, which was being transported in a car bearing No.KL 55 U 3437. The accused were arrested on the spot with the contraband article. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri.P.S.Binu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations leveled against them. There is no material to substantiate the petitioners' involvement in the crime. The petitioners have been in judicial custody for the last three months, the investigation in the case is complete and recovery has been effected. Moreover, the petitioners have reliably learnt that the contraband involved in the case is not 'MDMA' but only 'methamphetamine' as per the chemical analysis report. Therefore, the contraband is of an intermediate quantity. Hence, the application may be allowed.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the investigation in the case is in progress. She also stated that, if the petitioners are released on bail, there is every likelihood of them committing similar offences. Hence, the application may be dismissed. However, the learned Public Prosecutor made available the chemical analysis report issued by the Regional Chemical Examiner's Laboratory, Kozhikode dated 03.05.2024 which substantiates the fact that the contraband involved in the case is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA' as alleged by the prosecution.

The prosecution was launched against the petitioners on the allegation that they were found in conscious possession of 28.03 grams of MDMA, which is of a commercial quantity. Indisputably, as per the chemical analysis report referred to above, the contraband has turned out to be 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is of an intermediate quantity. Moreover, the petitioners have been in judicial custody for the last three months and have no criminal antecedents.

On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, the materials placed on record, particularly the fact that the contraband involved in the case is of an intermediate quantity, the petitioners do not have criminal antecedents, the petitioners have been in judicial custody for the last three months and the investigation in the case is practically complete, I am of the view that the petitioners' further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. They shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

(iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while they are on bail;

(iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passports, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passports, they shall file affidavits to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond;

(v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law.

(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below.

(vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].