Syam vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’, for short), by the first accused in Crime No.992/2024 of the Irinjalakuda Police Station, Thrissur, which is registered against the accused persons for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘NDPS Act’). The petitioner was arrested on 27.07.2024.

The essence of the prosecution case is that; on 27.07.2024, at around 21:30 hours, the first accused was found in conscious possession of 19.28 grams of MDMA. He was arrested on the spot with the contraband article. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the second accused also assisted the first accused in procuring the contraband article. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

Heard: Sri. Francis Assisi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C. S. Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. There is no material to substantiate the petitioner’s involvement in the case. The Investigating Officer has deliberately implicated the petitioner as an accused. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last two months, the investigation in the case is complete and recovery has been effected. Furthermore, as per the Chemical Analysis Report submitted by the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Thrissur dated 26.9.2024, it has turned out that the contraband involved in the case is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is only of an intermediate quantity. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. Hence, the application may be allowed.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He submitted that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of him committing a similar offence. Nonetheless, he did not dispute the fact that the investigation in the case is complete, the charge sheet has been filed and as per the Chemical Analysis Report, the contraband involved in the case is ‘methamphetamine and is of an intermediate quantity.

The prosecution was launched against the petitioner on the allegation that the first accused was found in conscious possession of 19.28 grams of 'MDMA', which is of a commercial quantity. Now, as per the chemical analysis report, it has turned out that the contraband involved in the case is 'Methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'. Admittedly, the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 27.7.2024, the  investigation  in  the  case  is  complete,  and  the charge sheet has been filed. Furthermore, the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents.

On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials placed on record, particularly on considering the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last two months, the contraband involved in the case is of an intermediate quantity, investigation in the case is practically complete, the charge sheet has been filed and the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, I am of the view that the petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, 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 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 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 court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he 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].