Nikhil M.U 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 Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.527/2024 of the Pudukad Police Station, Thrissur, which is registered against them for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The petitioners were arrested on 21.05.2024.

The gist of the prosecution case is that: on 21.05.2024, at around 10.10 hours, the accused Nos.1 to 3 were transporting 1.14 grams of MDMA for the purpose of sale in a car bearing Reg.No.MH-05/BJ-7979. The accused were arrested then and there at the spot with the contraband article.

Thus, the accused have committed the above offence.

Heard; Sri. Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Seetha S., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations leveled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. In any given case, the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 21.05.2024, the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, the contraband that was allegedly seized from the accused is of an intermediate quantity, the investigation in the case is practically complete, and the recovery has been effected. Therefore, the petitioners’ further detention is unnecessary. 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 submitted that if the petitioners are let off on bail, there is every likelihood of them committing similar offences. Nonetheless, she did not dispute the fact that the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents and the contraband involved in the case is of an intermediate quantity.

After bestowing my anxious consideration to the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials placed on record, especially on considering the fact that the contraband allegedly seized from the accused is of an intermediate quantity, that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 21.05.2024, that the investigation in the case is practically complete, and that the recovery has been effected, 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) each 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].