Neeraj vs State Of Kerala

Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J

This application is filed u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.

The applicant is the accused No.1 in crime no.06/2023 of Vadanappilly Excise Range, Thrissur. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 22 (c), 29 and 25 of the NDPS Act.

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 14.02.2023, at about 2.30 pm, the applicant was found in possession of 1.042 gms of MDMA and on the same day at 5.25 pm, accused No.2 was found in possession of 10.068 gms of MDMA and the contraband articles were supplied to the accused by one Mr.Sajith, who brought it from Bangalore.

I have heard Sri.Shaju Purushothaman, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.P.G.Manu, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to get bail. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

Even though, Section 22 (c) of the NDPS Act is alleged, it appears that, so far as the applicant is concerned, Section 22 (b) alone is attracted. The recovery from the possession of the applicant is only 1.042 gms of MDMA, which is intermediary quantity. Going by the prosecution case, on 14.02.2023 at 2.00 pm, the detecting officer found the applicant on the side of a road and on questioning, it was found that he was in possession of 1.042 gms of MDMA. On further questioning, the applicant revealed that he along with the accused No.2 brought MDMA from one Sajith of Bangalore. Accordingly, on the same day at 5.25 pm, the detecting officer along with the applicant went to accused No.2 and 10.068 gms of MDMA were seized from his possession. Thus, the recovery is distinct and different and by two different mahazers. Apart from the confession of the applicant, there is nothing to connect him with the contraband allegedly seized from the possession of accused No.2. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 14.02.2023. The investigation is almost over. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. For all these reasons, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the applicant is required for any purpose. Hence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

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

(i) The applicant shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The applicant shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicant shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of the bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.