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
8 paragraphs · 394 wordsViju Abraham, J
This is an application for regular bail.
The petitioner is accused No. 10 in Crime No.248/2022 of Angamaly Police Station, Ernakulam, alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c), 20 (b)(ii)(b), 8(c), 27 A & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
The prosecution allegation is that, on 5/3/2022, at about 11.45 pm, the petitioner/ 10th accused along with other accused were found in possession of 11.130 kilogram of Ganja and 1.525 Kilogram of Hashish Oil in a Honda City Car bearing registration No.KL-07-AV-2050 belongs to the 1st accused which was parked in the parking shed of Federal City Flat Complex, Karayamparambu, Karukutty, with intention to sale and amass money in contravention of the NDPS Act and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.
4 .The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 02.04.2022 and she is in custody since then. The specific case of the petitioner is that she has been falsely arrayed as an accused in the above said crime, only due to her close acquaintance with the 2nd accused. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. Though the petitioner moved an application for bail before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam, the same was rejected by Annexure A6 order.
The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the contraband seized is of commercial quantity and that the investigation is in progress. It is further submitted that as per the the investigation so far conducted there is financial transactions between the accused persons, including the petitioner herein and that the investigation further reveals that the petitioner has also travelled to Andhra Pradesh along with the 2nd accused, for procuring the contraband.
Since the contraband seized being of commercial quantity, the rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act will come to play. No substantial contentions have been raised by the petitioner to get over the rigor of Section 37. I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not successful in establishing that her case will not come under the rigor of the twin conditions mentioned in Section 37 of the NDPS Act. In view of the same and considering the serious nature of the allegations, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed.