Saibi Saimon vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the seventh accused in Crime No.514/2024 of the Thrikkakara Police Station, Ernakulam, which is registered against the accused (seven in number) for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 22(c) & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The petitioner was arrested on 10.05.2024.

The gist of the prosecution case is that: on 10.05.2024, at around 16.00 hours, the accused were found in conscious possession of 48.59 grams of MDMA. The accused were arrested then and there at the spot with the contraband article. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

Heard;  Smt.Padma  Lakshmi,  the  learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V , the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations leveled against her. There is no material to substantiate the petitioner’s involvement in the crime. The petitioner has reliably learnt that the contraband article allegedly seized from her is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is only of an intermediate quantity. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. The petitioner has been languishing in jail for the last two months, the investigation in the case is complete, and the recovery has been effected. Therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the investigation in the case is in progress. She also stated that, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of her committing a similar offence. Therefore, the application may be dismissed. Nonetheless, she made available the chemical analysis report dated 28.06.2024 issued by the Chemical Analysis Laboratory Department, Kakkanad, which substantiates that the contraband article is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA' as alleged by the prosecution. She also did not dispute the fact that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents.

The prosecution allegation is that the accused were found in conscious possession of 48.59 grams of MDMA. However, as per the chemical analysis report, it has turned out that the contraband is ‘methamphetamine’ and not ‘MDMA’. Therefore, 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 petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last two months, that the investigation in the case is practically complete, that the recovery has been effected, and further that the contraband allegedly seized from the accused is of an intermediate quantity and the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, I am of the firm view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. Therefore, I am inclined to allow the bail application.

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on her 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 petitioner 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. She shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii)The petitioner 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 her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while she is on bail;

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender her passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If she has no passport, she shall file an affidavit 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 petitioner even while the petitioner is 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].