9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (10) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scoveries. It was revealed that Rajesh was a passenger leaving India for Brussels. He had an air-ticket for a journey between Bombay-Brussels-Bombay. He admitted being in possession of brown sugar. Atul and Pradeep admitted that they had accompanied Rajesh to see him off 'safely'. Rajesh, Atul and Pradeep, along with the baggage of Rajesh, were taken to the office of the Central Excise Department at Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Bombay-400012, duly accompanied by panch-witnesses. There, brown sugar weighing 1110 gms. valued at Rs. 2,20,000/- concealed under cashewnuts in tins was recovered from Rajesh's baggage. In the follow up action, respondent No. 4 (hereinafter referred to as 'Kirti') who is brother of Atul was traced at Glamour Guest House, Kandivli, Bombay. Kirti led the officers to his rented premises in Parwana building at Borivli, Bombay. A search of the said flat resulted into recovery of brown sugar weighing 1450 gms. valued at Rs. 2,90,000/-. The same was seized. Packing materials, weighing machine and electrically operated press for sealing tins etc. were also found in the flat and seized. 3. Rajesh, Atul, Pradeep and Kirti were put under arrest at about 10.30 hr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation No. 1917 of 1988, on 26th September, 1988, by a reasoned order, I directed the registry of this Court to issue notices to Rajesh, Pradeep, Atul and Kirti to show cause why the bail orders passed in their favour should not be cancelled. Record and proceedings of the lower court were also called for with a view to examine them. 10. In support of the said notices, Mr. Patwardhan submits that the bail applications on behalf of the four accused persons were opposed by and on behalf of the Central Excise Department pointing out to the learned Magistrate that this is a case of narcotic drugs involving international gang and the department required more time to investigate and further that there were no changed circumstances after the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had remanded the accused persons to custody from 26th August, 1988 to 9th September, 1988 and also that Rajesh was a repeater in the same offence which submissions were not considered by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate who by his cryptic orders released the accused persons on bail. Mr. Patwardhan further submits that the bail orders passed in favour of the accused persons here were in violation of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sts in this case warranting cancellation of bail of Atul, Pradeep and Kirti. In support of her contentions, Miss Safari relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court and Guwahati and Sikkim High Courts in the cases of (1) The State through the Delhi Administration v. Sanjay Gandhi (1978 Cri. L.J. 952), (2) Bhagirathsingh Judeja v. State of Gujarat (1984 Cri. L.J.160), (3) Khagendra Nath Bayan and another v. The State of Assam (1982 Cri. L.J.2109) and (4) Sambhunath Bhattacharjee v. State of Sikkim (1980 Cri. L.J.785). 13. Before I embark upon discussing the merits of the matter, let me first narrate the legislative history leading to the passing of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 which may enlighten us to be more alive to our pious duty of discharging judicial functions to serve and do justice to the people for whom the courts are meant and not look to the individual liberty of a few who are a nuisance to the society. Thus, the statutory control over narcotic drugs was exercised in India through a number of Central and State enactments. The principal Central Acts, namely, the Opium Act 1857, the Opium Act, 1878 and the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930 were enact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntions relating to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances to which India has been a party, was felt and as a result the present Act was enacted in the year 1985. The only deficiency which I notice in this enactment is the absence of death penalty for an accused person found guilty of some of the offences enumerated in it. 14. Now, on careful consideration of the record and proceedings of the case and the submissions made at the Bar, I am unable to persuade myself to agree with any of the contentions raised on behalf of the accused by Mr. Gupte and Miss Safari. The record shows that these four accused persons have international links in the racket of disposal of narcotic drugs and their nefarious activities of dealing in brown sugar are well-schemed, well-planned and well-designed as a result of deep-rooted conspiracy. They made attempts to smuggle large quantity of brown sugar in polythene bags wrapped in carbon papers and concealed in the cavities between the inner and outer plastic bodies of a thermos called "Hot-pot". They were also found in possession of packing material, a sensitive weighing machine and electrically operated press for sealing tins. Their statements record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Magistrate should think twice before granting bail. One should bear in mind that these offences are of very grave type where the minimum punishment is 10 years with a fine of a lakh of rupees and the maximum may extend to 20 years with a fine of rupees two lakhs and for the special reasons even more than two lakhs. Although the accused persons for this sort of an offence cannot be visited with a penalty of death sentence or imprisonment of life, I am of the opinion that such offences are not less serious than those punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Left to myself, I would recommend the legislature to make provision of death sentence for such offences because in the commission of these offences not murder but mass murders are involved. While dealing with a case of economic offences, the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and another (1987 Cri. L.J.1061), was pleased to observe : "Ends of justice are not satisfied only when the accused in a criminal case is acquitted. The Community acting through the State and the Public Prosecutor is also entitled to justice. The cause of the Community deserves equal treatment at the hands of the Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bail in a case like this is the need of the hour. 17. In this view of the matter, the suo motu action, which I am told by Miss Safari is unprecedented, succeeds and the bail orders passed in favour of the four accused persons by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate are cancelled in accordance with the provisions of sub-section 2 of Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in the interest of justice and for the greater good of the larger number of people. 18. In view of the cancellation of bail, the criminal application No. 1917 of 1988 does not survive and stands disposed of. But before I part with the matter, let me say how I feel about the propriety of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in accepting Mukesh Chhotalal Shah as a surety for two accused persons for a large sum of rupees four lakhs. He is a person from Baroda and thus not domiciled in the State of Maharashtra and, therefore, ordinarily he should not have been accepted surety as was done here. I do not suggest for a moment that a person who has no territorial roots in the State of Maharashtra is never to be accepted as a surety. But one has to be very careful before doing so because in the event of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
