The Karnataka High Court dismissed a bail petition filed by accused number 2 under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for offences under the NDPS Act involving commercial quantity of MDMA, noting a prior rejection and distinct allegations compared to an accused granted bail earlier for supplying drugs.
Bail prayer dismissed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MAY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G. UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2321/2022
BETWEEN:
MR. SAHIL MOHAMMAD AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS S/O SAIPUDDIN RESIDING AT SAWARBA NEAR 1ST RAILWAY BRIDGE MARNAMINAKATTE MANGALORE TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT KARNATAKA.
… PETITIONER
(BY SRI: Y.T. HEGADE, ADVOCATE FOR SMT: NIVEDITHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA KONAJE POLICE STATION DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT. REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.
… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI: S.VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN SPL.C.NO.103/2021 (CR.NO.19/2020) OF E AND N CR.P.S., MANGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 21, 21(C) OF N.D.P.S ACT., ON THE FILE OF PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE IN KALABURAGI BENCH, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
The petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.19 of 2020 of E and N Crime Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21 and 21(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant Mohan.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2. He is innocent and
3
has not committed any offences as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. He was apprehended on 09.08.2020 and since then he is in judicial custody. The investigation is completed and the charge sheet is already filed. Similar petition was filed by the petitioner along with accused No.1 in Criminal Petition No.769 of 2021 and the said petition came to be dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2021. However, thereafter accused No.4 was enlarged on bail by the Trial Court. Therefore, on principle of parity, this petitioner is also entitled for grant of bail. Hence, he prays for allowing of the petition.
4
with that of accused No.4 is not maintainable. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
"Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Negative' for the
following:
REASONS
Petition No.769 of 2021 seeking to enlarge him on bail. The said petition was considered on merits and came to be dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2021. While dismissing the said petition, it is specifically observed that commercial quantity of MDMA was recovered from the custody of the petitioner. The FSL report confirmed that the sample sent for analysis was MDMA. Prima facie materials are placed before the Court for having recovered the commercial quantity of contraband from the possession of the petitioner. Therefore,
5
Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act comes into operation. It is also observed that unless the accused satisfies the twin requirements mentioned therein to believe that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit similar offence while on bail, he is not entitled for bail. Without addressing any of these observations, the petitioner is again before this Court on the ground that accused No.4 is granted bail. The allegations against accused No.4 is entirely different and no contraband was seized from his possession. The only allegations against him is that he is the supplier of drug and therefore, I do not find any reason to consider the prayer once again.
The petition is dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
*bgn/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in an NDPS offence involving commercial quantity of drugs?
3 provisions across 2 enactments
MR. SAHIL MOHAMMAD
STATE OF KARNATAKA
M.G. UMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
