2022 (6) TMI 486 - SC - Indian Laws

Rejection of Bail application - Smuggling - Heroin - narcotic substance - case of petitioner is that the entire case of the prosecution is based on suspicion - HELD THAT - There is sufficient material on record to deny the discretionary relief of bail to the petitioner. Much is sought to be made of the five Ghol fish netted by the petitioner and his crew members over five days of remaining on the high seas by referring to the high market value of the prize catch. The petitioner would be entitled to justify his presence in the fishing boat, at the scene of crime which is sought to be described as a sheer coincidence during the trial. The explanation offered by the petitioner of having responded to the call Mohammed-Mohammed- Ramzan-Ramzan on Channel No.8, instead of Channel No.16 which is the specifically earmarked channel for communication with fishermen and for Ship-to-Ship contact, would also be available to him at that stage. But at the threshold, this appears to be a case where the petitioner has been fishing in troubled waters and as per the respondent No.1/NIA, has got caught in his own net. Records reveal that the chargesheet has been filed by the respondent/NIA on 18.12.2020. As per the said chargesheet, nine Pakistani nationals are still absconding. Further, investigation in the case is still pending. The petitioner has been chargesheeted for a serious offence where the minimum punishment prescribed is of ten years - discretion need not be exercised in favour of the petitioner by interfering with the impugned order, at present. Special leave to appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petition for special leave to appeal against the order rejecting bail in a case involving offenses under various Acts related to narcotics smuggling.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought special leave to appeal against the order rejecting his bail application in a case involving offenses under IPC, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The case originated from the seizure of a significant quantity of narcotics near Jakhau Port, Gujarat, in a joint operation by the Indian Coast Guard and DRI. The prosecution's case linked the petitioner to the drug consignment based on his presence and responses during a communication interception operation.

2. The prosecution's narrative highlighted the interception of a Pakistani boat carrying narcotics in Indian waters. The petitioner's fishing boat was found nearby, and his responses to a communication test raised suspicions. The investigation suggested a link between the petitioner and the drug smuggling operation, leading to his detention and subsequent denial of bail by the Special Judge and the Gujarat High Court.

3. The petitioner, through his counsel, argued that the case against him was based on mere suspicion and circumstantial evidence. The defense emphasized the petitioner's clean antecedents, his unique name coinciding with the intercepted communication, and his legitimate fishing activities as reasons to grant him bail. The defense contended that the prosecution's case lacked substantial evidence to justify the petitioner's continued detention.

4. The respondent, represented by the Additional Solicitor General, opposed the bail plea, highlighting the seriousness of the charges, including organized drug smuggling with potential links to terrorist activities. The respondent pointed out the filing of a charge sheet against the petitioner and the absconding Pakistani nationals, underscoring the ongoing nature of the investigation and the gravity of the offenses involved.

5. The Supreme Court, after considering the arguments from both sides, opined that there was sufficient material on record to deny bail to the petitioner. The Court noted the serious nature of the charges, the ongoing investigation, and the potential implications of the case. The Court declined to interfere with the lower courts' decisions, emphasizing the gravity of the allegations and the need for a thorough trial process before making any definitive judgments on the case's merits.