Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2017 (4) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (4) TMI 138 - HC - Customs


Issues:
Petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. - Allegations of involvement in NDPS Act offense - Apprehension of arrest by respondent police.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
The petitioner filed a petition seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) to direct the police to release him on bail in case of arrest in a pending case related to the NDPS Act. The petitioner contended that he was only a Director in the company where the alleged offense took place and claimed to be unconnected to the allegations and seizure of the psychotropic substance. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail due to the fear of arrest by the respondent.

Issue 2: Allegations of Involvement in NDPS Act Offense
The prosecution's case involved a raid on a company's premises where ketamine was seized, leading to the arrest of one Director. The Director allegedly implicated the petitioner in knowing about the manufacturing of ketamine. The respondent police issued a notice to the petitioner for his statement, prompting the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail. The prosecution argued that the petitioner's role needed to be investigated through custodial interrogation as the offense was serious under Section 22 of the NDPS Act.

Issue 3: Apprehension of Arrest by Respondent Police
The Court analyzed the grounds of the bail petition, complaint averments, and previous orders related to the case. It noted that the petitioner's name was not listed as an accused person, and the prosecution needed to establish his involvement beyond reasonable doubt during the evidence stage. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's apprehension of arrest by the respondent and granted anticipatory bail, imposing conditions such as executing a personal bond, cooperating with the investigation, and appearing before the Jurisdictional Court within a specified time.

In conclusion, the High Court of Karnataka granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the NDPS Act case, emphasizing the need for the prosecution to establish the petitioner's involvement during the evidence stage. The judgment highlighted the petitioner's right to seek anticipatory bail based on a reasonable apprehension of arrest and imposed conditions to ensure his cooperation with the investigation and appearance before the court.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates