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
14 paragraphs · 522 wordsDr. Kauser Edappagath, J
This is the 7th bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail.
The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.30/2022 of Amaravila Excise Range Office, Thiruvananthapuram. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 8(c) and 25 of the NDPS Act.
The prosecution case, in short, is that, on 26.8.2022 at 10.35 a.m., the applicant was found in possession of 36 kilograms of ganja in contravention of the provisions of the NDPS Act and Rules and thereby committed the offence.
I have heard Sri.Babu S. Nair, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. B.S. Syamanthak, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
The learned counsel for the applicant relying on the latest decision of the Supreme Court in Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024 KHC OnLine 8248) submitted that the applicant is in custody for the last two years and two months and as such, he is entitled to get released on bail.
In the light of the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is entitled to get released on bail based on the dictum laid down in Ankur Chaudhary (supra), a report was called for from the 1st Additional Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram to ascertain the status of the case and reasonable time required to dispose of the same. The 1st Additional Sessions Judge submitted a report stating that the trial of the case has not been commenced yet and it will take at least twelve months to dispose of the case. In Ankur Chaudhary (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that failure to conclude the trial within a reasonable time resulting in prolonged incarceration militates against the precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and as such, conditional liberty overriding the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act may, in such circumstances, be considered.
Considering the fact that the applicant is in judicial custody for the last two years and two months and there is no possibility of concluding the trial immediately, I am of the view that the applicant can 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 not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.
(v) 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.
