The High Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in an NDPS case involving the recovery of a commercial quantity of Ganja from his vehicle, noting his failure to cooperate with the investigation.
Prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail was rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 1473 of 2019
Motiram Mohanty … Petitioner Versus
… Opposite Parties ------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Sr. Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P. For the N.C.B. : Mr. Rajiv Sinha, A.S.G.I. ------
Order No.08 Dated- 20.06.2019
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with NDPS Case No.06 of 2018 corresponding to NCB Crime 06/NCB/Ranchi/2018 in which cognizance has been taken against the petitioner under section 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 & 29 of the NDPS Act.
Heard the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, learned Addl. P.P. for the State and the learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau.
The Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the brief facts of the case is that the informant raided the house of Jagarnath Prasad Rai, the co-accused of the petitioner and 198 Kg of Ganja was recovered from his house and further 20 Kg of Ganja was recovered from the Swift Dzire car of the petitioner bearing registration no. OD10A 5112 upon which a fake number plate bearing registration number JH01BN 4959 was fixed. It is further submitted by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner is cooperating with the investigation of the case and the petitioner is a reputed person being a teacher in a Primary School at Odisha. It is next submitted that though confessional statement of two accused persons have been recorded yet they have not stated anything to implicate the
petitioner in this case. It is further submitted that the driver of the vehicle of the petitioner namely Diwakar Moharana took the car of the petitioner in the guise of some medical emergency in his family but he used the said car for illegally transporting Ganja of which the petitioner was totally unaware and though he received notice dated 16.05.2018 by which he was directed to appear before the Narcotics Control Bureau, Ranchi on 23.01.2018 but he received the notice after the scheduled date of appearance but the petitioner has duly responded to the notice vide letter dated 30.05.2018 in which he has clearly mentioned the facts that his driver took his car stating about the medical emergency. It is further submitted that the petitioner has furnished the detailed residential address of his driver namely Diwakar Moharana. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and except seizure of the car owned by the petitioner, there is no other material to implicate the petitioner in this case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the materials from the sack found in the vehicle of the petitioner was tested with drug detection kit available with the NCB team and in all instances the tests yielded positive for the test of cannabis and the total cannabis (Ganja) seized in this case is 218 Kgs out of which 20 Kg was from the car of the petitioner. It is further submitted that though notices under section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act were issued to the petitioner on several occasions but the petitioner never turned up before the Investigating Officer of this case to cooperate with the investigation and though the petitioner himself confessed in his representation dated 30.05.2018 sent to the Narcotics Control Bureau, Ranchi, that he gave his vehicle to one Diwakar Moharana on 18.02.2018 but despite a lapse of considerable period he did not lodge any complaint for missing of his driver and Swift Dzire car
bearing registration no. OD10A 5112 . It is next submitted that the petitioner was himself involved in Ganja trafficking and is trying to save himself he is trying to shift his criminal liability to one Diwakar Moharana. It is then submitted that the petitioner has never responded to the notices dated 16.05.2018 and 23.01.2018 sent to him by the Narcotics Control Bureau. It is further submitted that keeping in view the gravity of the offence together with the commercial quantity of Ganja having been recovered in this case, the prayer for anticipatory bail is covered by the rigors of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. It is then submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required during the investigation of the case to unearth the network and chain of supply of the huge quantity of Ganja seized in connection with this case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the huge quantity of Ganja seized in this case and the requirement of the custodial interrogation of the petitioner during the investigation of the case and the fact that he is not cooperating with the investigation of this case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )
Sonu/Gunjan-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with the recovery of Ganja from his vehicle.
Whether the non-cooperation of the petitioner with the investigation justifies a refusal of anticipatory bail.
Whether the commercial quantity of drugs seized renders the case fit for custodial interrogation under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Motiram Mohanty
State of Jharkhand
Union of India through N.C.B.
Anil Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
