High CourtsSingle Bench

Sreekumar Alias Chillu Sreekumar vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 26 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 KL CK 0141

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Menon, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 20(b)(ii)B, 29, 37, 60(3)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 7335 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

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

27 paragraphs · 584 words
1.

The applicant is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 56 of 2019 of Excise Enforcement and Anti Narcotic Special Squad, Kollam, for having allegedly

committed offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)B, 29 and 60(3) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for Short, the

“NDPS Actâ€​). The prosecution case, in brief, is this:

2.

The 1st accused was found to be in possession of 1.100kg of ganja, while he was in the company of the applicant, who is his brother. It is stated

that the first accused was already released on bail after his arrest. But, the applicant who was arrested on 21/08/2019, continues to be in judicial

custody. The bail application filed by him before the jurisdictional court was dismissed mainly for the reason that he has four other criminal

antecedents against him. The applicant has been in custody for more than a year. The applicant submits that stringent conditions may be imposed to

release him on bail because there is no possibility of the trial getting over in the near future.

3.

A report was called for from the Additional Sessions Judge IV, Kollam, regarding the present status of the case. It is submitted by the learned

Judge that the chemical examiner’s report is still awaited. The matter is posted to January and in case, the chemical analysis report is received,

earnest endeavour shall be made to dispose of the matter within six months. If that be so, it is going to take further time and it is not sure when the

chemical examiner’s report would be available. The quantity involved in this case is only intermediary and therefore, the embargo under Section

37 of the NDPS Act is also not applicable. The bail was denied to the applicant solely for the reason that he has got four other criminal cases against

him. The justification for rejection of the bail can be understood and is also reasonable. But, the fact remains that the applicant has been in custody

since 21-08-2019, and the possibility of the trial getting over in the near future is also very bleak. Under the circumstances, I find that the applicant is

entitled to be released on bail on stringent conditions.

4.

In the result, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One

lakh only), with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on following further conditions:

(i) He shall appear before the trial court on all posting dates without fail unless exempted by the trial court.

(ii) He shall surrender his passport before the Investigating Officer and if he does not have one, file an affidavit to that effect, which shall be produced

before the jurisdictional court and he shall not go abroad without the permission of the jurisdictional court.

(iii) He shall deposit a sum of Rs 25,000/- before the jurisdictional court as a security deposit to ensure that he appears for every posting date. The

amount shall stand forfeited, in case, he commits a breach of appearance before the court.

(iv) He shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.

(v) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail period.

In case of breach of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

The bail application is allowed.