2024 (12) TMI 1040 - HC - Customs

Seeking regular bail in an NDPS case involving possession of a commercial quantity of Ganja - offence punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20, 28, 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) - HELD THAT - Where prima facie involvement of the Accused is apparent, the contentions raised regarding the contradictions in the charge sheet are required to be tested at the time of trial, but not at this stage. The period of incarceration by itself would not entitle the Petitioner/Accused to be enlarged on bail. Filing of the charge sheet establishes that after due investigation, the investigation agency, having found materials, has placed the charge sheet for the trial of the Petitioner. Taking into account the cumulative effect of entire facts and circumstances, without commenting upon the merits of the evidence, and the substantial quantity of contraband involved, the manner of its commission, and its impact on the society, it is evident that the Petitioner is not entitled to bail, at this stage. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeking regular bail in an NDPS case involving possession of a commercial quantity of Ganja.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a criminal petition filed by the Petitioner seeking regular bail in an NDPS case where he was found in possession of a substantial quantity of Ganja. The Petitioner and another individual were intercepted by Customs officers while transporting the contraband in a cargo vehicle. The officers discovered 428.675 kilograms of Ganja concealed in 220 packets during inspection. Both the Petitioner and the other individual confessed to their involvement in the illicit dealing of Ganja. The Petitioner argued that he had no prior involvement in narcotics transportation, was unaware of the Ganja in the vehicle, and is willing to cooperate in the trial. However, the court noted that the Petitioner had been in judicial custody since his arrest and that the previous bail application was already dismissed. The court emphasized that the recovery of a commercial quantity of Ganja from the Petitioner and the other individual was a significant factor. The court highlighted that the period of incarceration alone does not warrant bail and that the charge sheet being filed indicates the agency's readiness for trial. The court concluded that considering the facts, circumstances, and the impact of the offense on society, the Petitioner was not entitled to bail at that stage, leading to the dismissal of the petition.