2019 (11) TMI 486 - HC - Indian Laws

Bail application - offence punishable Section 23(b) and Section 28 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Smuggling - Ganja - contraband item - section 67 of the NDPS Act - HELD THAT - Though the allegations are extremely grave, fact remains that the quantity seized from the possession of the applicant is just above the upper limit of the smaller quantity. There is no case for the prosecution that the applicant is involved in any other crimes. Furthermore, the case records reveal that the investigation has made much headway. In the facts and circumstances, by imposing stringent conditions the applicant can now be enlarged on bail - applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for ₹ 50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction - Application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for accused charged under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

In this judgment, the accused filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused was charged in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for offenses under Section 23(b) and Section 28. The prosecution alleged that the accused was intercepted at the airport with ganja in his possession, intending to smuggle foreign currency to Dubai. The accused claimed innocence, stating he was unaware of the contraband in the bag given to him by someone else for a business trip. The defense argued that the accused, a young man, should be released as the investigation was at an advanced stage. The prosecution, represented by the Special Public Prosecutor, contended that the accused's actions indicated criminal intent and potential involvement in an international drug mafia, emphasizing the gravity of the offense and the risk of reoffending if granted bail.

Upon reviewing the submissions and case records, the court acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations but noted that the quantity seized was slightly above the permissible limit, with no evidence linking the accused to other crimes. The court considered the progress of the investigation and decided that stringent conditions could be imposed for the accused's release on bail. The court granted bail to the accused upon executing a bond of ?50,000 with two solvent sureties, subject to conditions including regular appearances before the Investigating Officer, non-interference with witnesses or evidence, refraining from similar offenses, and surrendering the passport or filing an affidavit if not in possession of one. Any violation of these conditions empowered the jurisdictional court to consider cancellation of bail.

Overall, the judgment balanced the seriousness of the offense with the stage of investigation and the individual circumstances of the accused, ultimately allowing bail with strict conditions to ensure compliance and address concerns regarding potential reoffending or flight risk.