Allowed

Miranda Rodriguez Daniela v. Union of India

Karnataka HC10 Dec 2024CRL.P/11314/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bolivian national arrested at Bengaluru airport with 1.302 kg cocaine sought regular bail under NDPS Act offences. Court noted prolonged custody, no antecedents, and slow trial; granted bail subject to detention-centre custody, bond, passport surrender and movement restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.2 lakh with one surety; detained in detention centre till trial; passport surrendered to trial court; movement restricted to trial court jurisdiction

Miranda Rodriguez Daniela Vs Union of India — Narcotics (NDPS) | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11314 OF 2024

¶7

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶8

BETWEEN: MIRANDA RODRIGUEZ DANIELA D/O. ADAM MIRANDA VEDIA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT SANTACRUZ, SANCARGO PROVINCIA, ICHILO, BOLIVIA - 110 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJU T.A., ADVOCATE) AND: UNION OF INDIA THROUGH INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU BANGALORE ZONAL UNIT, NO. 7/1-2, PRIYANK VILLAS, RAMANNA GARDEN, BAGLUR MAIN ROAD, KOTTIGENAHALLI, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-560 063, REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATES OFFICE AT ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE, HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. UNNIKRISHNAN M.,ADVOCATE)

¶9

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶10

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. (FILED UNDER SECTION 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON IN FILE C.NO.VII/10/74/2020 BACC CIU OF INSPECTOR OF CUSTOMS FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 22, 23, 27A, 28, 29, 30 AND 8c OF NDPS ACT WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE XXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL. JUDGE (NDPS) AT BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.753/2020

¶11

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶12

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

Accused in Spl.C.No.80/2023 pending before the Court of XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru, arising out of NCB F.NO.48/1/15/2022/BZU registered by Narcotics Control Bureau, Bengaluru Zonal Unit, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 23(c) & 28 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS’ Act) is before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

It is the case of the prosecution that on

¶17

25.07.2022 the first informant received a credible

¶18

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶19

information that a female passenger by name Miranda Rodriguez Daniela of Bolivia Nationality, who was scheduled to arrive from Addis Ababa at Kempegowda International Airport, Bangalore by Ethiopian Airlines flight No ET-690 was suspected of carrying contraband article and based on such an information the aforesaid female passenger was intercepted on 25.07.2022 at about 7.50 hours at Bengaluru International Airport and on verification it was found that the suspect was carrying 1.302 Kgs of Cocaine which was concealed inside her hand bag. The seized contraband article was subjected to panchanaama and the apprehended accused was arrested and subsequently produced before the Court and remanded to judicial custody. Investigation in the case is completed and complaint has been filed before the jurisdictional Court against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences.

¶20

Bail application filed by the petitioner before the trial Court in Crl.Misc.No.6929/2024 was rejected on 09.09.2024. Therefore, she is before this Court.

¶21

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶23

petitioner is a lady aged about 23 years, having no criminal antecedents, she is in custody from 26.07.2023 onwards. Before the trial Court till date only one witness has been examined out of the 7 charge sheet witnesses. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶24

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent who has opposed the bail petition, submits that contraband article seized from the custody of the petitioner is of commercial quantity and therefore, rigor under Section 37(1)(b) of NDPS Act is applicable to the petitioner's case. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

¶25

The petitioner is a lady aged about 23 years and she is in custody for the last two years four months. Undisputedly, she has no other criminal antecedents. The prosecution has all together cited 7 charge witnesses in the present case. CW-4 Mukhesh Kumar Gautam was examined as PW-1 before the trial Court in the month of

¶26

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶27

December-2023, and he has been completely cross examined thereafter. Subsequently Murari Lal, CW-1 has been examined as PW-2 in part on 28.03.2024. Thereafter, on several dates of hearing the said witnesses has not appeared before the trial Court and he is yet to be cross examined.

¶28

In the case of Chitta Biswas Alias Subhas vs.

¶29

State of West Bengal reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 1536, the Hon'ble Supreme Court taking into consideration that the accused was in custody for a period of one year seven months and there was no sufficient progress in trial, without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, has granted regular bail to the accused. In the case of Nitish Adhikary alias Bapan vs.

¶30

State of West Bengal reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2068 in a case where charge sheet was filed for the offences punishable under Sections 21(c) and 37 of the NDPS Act and accused was in custody for a period of one year seven months, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has

¶31

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶32

granted regular bail on the ground that trial is still in the preliminary stage, as only one witness was examined.

¶33

In the background of the aforesaid judgments if the case of the petitioner who is in custody for the last two years four months is considered, I am of the view that her prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be answered affirmatively, more so in view of the proviso to Section 437(1) of Cr.P.C.

¶34

The coordinate bench of this Court in the case of BABUL KHAN & OTHERS V. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANOTHER in Crl.P.No.6578/2019 disposed of on 19.05.2020 has laid down certain guidelines to be followed by the Court while granting bail to foreign national, who does not hold a valid visa and passport. Undisputedly, the petitioner has no valid documents as on this date to stay in India. The petitioner who is a foreign national is required to be detained in detention centre at Bengaluru till the case registered against her is disposed of. The guidelines laid down by the coordinate bench of this Court

¶35

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶36

in BABUL KHAN's case (supra) and also the directions and guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

¶37

UPADHYAYA VS STATE OF A.P. & OTHERS - (2017)

¶38

15 SCC 337 , shall be strictly taken into consideration and followed by the competent authorities and the Trial Court shall periodically call for reports in this regard from the competent authorities.

¶39

Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the opinion that the prayer made by the petitioner for grant of regular bail is required to be answered affirmatively subject to appropriate conditions.

¶40

Accordingly, the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

The criminal petition is allowed.

¶43

The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in Spl.C.No.80/2023 pending before the Court of XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru, arising out of NCB F.NO.48/1/15/2022/BZU registered by Narcotics Control Bureau, Bengaluru Zonal Unit, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(c), 23(c) & 28 of the

¶44

¶45

NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶46

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, subject to the following conditions:

¶47

a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on she executing her personal bond for a sum of Rs.2 lakh with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶48

b) The Trial Court is hereby directed that, at the time of releasing the petitioner on bail, the Competent Authorities shall be informed to detain her in any of the Detention Centers in Bengaluru of near by Bengaluru till the trial is concluded.

¶49

c) It is also made clear that, under Section 3(2) of the Foreigners Act, if the Competent Authority feels that, by means of imposing restrictions on the movements of the petitioner by taking bond with or without surety for the observance or as on alternative to the enforcement of any of the prescribed or specific restrictions or conditions can control their movements, such orders may be passed by the Competent Authority with intimation to the Court.

¶50

d) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering or tampering the prosecution

¶51

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC:50958 CRL.P No. 11314 of 2024

¶53

witnesses and she shall be made available to the Court on all the future hearing dates unless she is exempted by the Court for any genuine reasons or cause.

¶54

e) The petitioner however, shall not leave the jurisdictional of the Trial Court without prior permission till the case registered against her is disposed of.

¶55

f) The petitioner's passport shall be surrendered before the Trial Court and shall remain in the custody of the Trial Court until further orders is passed by the Trial Court with regard to custody of the passport or till the case is disposed of before the Trial Court.

¶56

SD/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶57

ASN

¶58

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

Miranda Rodriguez Daniela v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Miranda Rodriguez Daniela v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri v Prashanth Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Girish N Vs State by Hebbal Police Station

Ravichandra D.R., Vs State of Karnataka

Venugopal N Vs the State by Varthur Police Station

Chandra @ Chandrashekara Bhat Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Biju G Vs State of Karnataka