Shahanul Farsad vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2024, by the sole accused in Crime No.409/2024 of Manjeri Police Station, Malappuram, which is registered against him for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 22(b), 20(b)(ii)(A) and 63 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, the Act). The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody on 01.10.2024.

The gist of the prosecution case is that: on 25.03.2024, at around 12:15 hours, the Detecting Officer and party found the accused in conscious possession of 51.46 grams of ganja and 07.73 grams of MDMA. On seeing the Detecting Officer, the accused ran away from the spot. Subsequently, the accused surrendered before the Investigating Officer. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri.P. Mohamed Sabah, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Pushpalatha. M.K., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no material to substantiate the petitioner’s involvement in the case. In any given case, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 01.10.2024, the investigation in the case is practically complete, and the recovery has been effected. Therefore, the petitioner’s 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 the petitioner is involved in another crime of a similar nature. If the petitioner is let off on bail, there is every likelihood of him committing a similar offence. Hence, the application may be dismissed.

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 petitioner has been in judicial custody since 05.10.2024, that the investigation in the case is practically complete, and that the recovery has been effected, I am of the view that the petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him 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 alternate Saturdays between 9.00 am and 11.00 am till the filing of the complaint (charge-sheet). He 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 him 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 he is on bail;

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the Jurisdictional Court at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the Jurisdictional Court 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 moved and entertained by the Jurisdictional Court.

(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 Anr.[2020 (1) KHC 663].