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
21 paragraphs · 524 wordsA. Badharudeen, J
This application for regular bail has been filed by the sole accused in Crime No.31/2022 of Amaravila Excise Range, Thiruvananthapuram.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.
I have perused the relevant documents.
The prosecution allegation is that, at about 9.40 p.m. on 27.8.2022, accused was found in possession of 2 kgs of Ganja, at his residential house, near Paliyode Junction, against the prohibitions contained in the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the NDPS Act' hereinafter). Accordingly, he was nabbed red-handedly and crime, alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, was registered. Now, final report already filed and the matter has been pending as S.C.No.2412/2022, before the Special Court (Additional Sessions Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram).
The learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, pointing out his custody from 27.8.2022 and also highlighting the fact that investigation has completed and the matter has been pending as Sessions Case, before the Special Court.
Whereas, the learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed bail, on the submission that the petitioner herein cannot be released on bail, since he has involvement in multiple crimes including offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also pointed out that he had involved in NDPS crime vide Crime No.11/2021 involving intermediate quantity and this crime was registered after his release in the said crime.
On perusal of the case diary, the prosecution case is well made out. 2 kgs of Ganja was seized from the possession of the petitioner from his own residential house. It is relevant to note that this is the 9th crime, where the petitioner got involved. Following are the crimes in relation to the petitioner:
Police Station FIR No. Section
Kattakkada Cr. 1567/2015 U/s 341,323,324,427,307,34 IPC
Kattakkada Cr. 422/2016 U/s 120(B), 109, 302, 201, 212, 34 IPC
Kattakkada Cr. 524/2016 U/s 107 CrPC
Kattakkada Cr. 1084/2016 U/s 294(b), 341,323, 324, 506(i), 34 IPC
Kattakkada Cr. 346/2017 U/s 151 CrPC
Kattakkada Cr. 203/2019 U/s 107 Cr.PC
Vithura Cr. 824/18 Arms Act U/s 27, U/s 143,144, 147,
Excise Range 148,149,294, 427, 451, 506 of IPC
Office, Kattakkada Cr.11/2021 U/s 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act 1985
It is shocking to note that, in the year 2015, he had involved in Crime No.1567/2015 of Kattakkada Police Station, involving offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. When he was released on bail, he had involved in a murder case, vide Crime No.422/2016. Thereafter, whenever he was released on bail, he repeatedly involved in serious crimes inclusive of one under NDPS Act, involving intermediate quantity. Thus, it appears that the petitioner has no respect to law and the apprehension expressed by the learned Public prosecutor, in case of his release, is having force.
Since the petitioner is a person, who involved in multiple crimes of serious nature, as discussed hereinabove, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
In the result, the bail application stands dismissed.
