Dismissed¶¶43

Augustine Dada v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Jul 2025CRL.P/4893/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NDPS regular bail refused — accused no.12, Spl.C.No.741/2024 (Crime No.329/2024, Hebbagodi P.S.); commercial quantity MDMA 49.6 g seized; foreigner overstaying after visa expiry; charge-sheet completion held not a ground for bail; s.483 BNSS 2023 petition dismissed (Karnataka HC, 14.07.2025).

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be rejected at this stage, and the petition is dismissed. ¶¶43

Augustine Dada Vs the State of Karnataka — Narcotics (NDPS) | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, accused no.12 in Spl.C.No.741/2024 charged under Sections 8(C) and 22(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶¶25

Court's answer

The petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be rejected at this stage, and the petition is dismissed.

¶¶43

Ratio / Principle

Though the petitioner was arrested based on the confession statement of accused nos.9 & 10, commercial quantity of contraband was seized from his possession, which prima facie shows that the alleged offences get attracted against him.

¶¶42

Key takeaways

Merely for the reason that investigation is completed and the charge sheet has been filed cannot be a ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail.ratio¶¶42
The petitioner, a foreigner, failed to give a valid explanation for overstaying in India after his Visa had expired, while on the other hand he was found indulging in trafficking of drugs.ratio¶¶43
The seized contraband tested positive for MDMA, and 49.6 grams of MDMA is considered commercial quantity under the relevant notification issued under the NDPS Act.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka HC (Single Judge, S Vishwajith Shetty J.), CRL.P No. 4893 of 2025 under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, decided 14 July 2025: Regular bail sought by accused no.12 in Spl.C.No.741/2024 (Crime No.329/2024, Hebbagodi P.S.) for offences under Sections 8(C), 22(c) NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 14 Foreigners Act, 1946. Petitioner, a foreigner with no valid documents to stay in India, was arrested on 12.06.2024 based on the confession of co-accused nos.9 & 10; 49.6 grams of MDMA (commercial quantity) was recovered from his possession and tested positive; his earlier bail application (Crl.Misc.No.2693/2024) was rejected on 03.02.2025. Held: completion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet cannot by themselves be grounds to enlarge an accused on bail; the petitioner gave no valid explanation for overstay after Visa expiry while being found indulging in trafficking of drugs; seizure of commercial quantity prima facie attracts the alleged offences. Prayer for regular bail rejected at this stage; petition dismissed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:25727 CRL.P No. 4893 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4893 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

AUGUSTINE DADA S/O LATE.CHUKWUDEBELU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.17 AND 18, 2ND FLOOR ROOM NO.8, 9TH MAIN 15TH CROSS, RAGHAVENDRA LAYOUT, K.G.HALLI, JALAHALLI WEST, BENGALURU - 560 015.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI SREEDHARA G.R, ADV.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HEBBAGODI P.S REP BY GOVERNMENT P.P.

¶15

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M, HCGP)

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNNS) PRAYING TO RELEASED ON ORDER OF REGULAR BAIL IN SPL.C NO.741/2024 AROSE OUT OF CRIME NO.329/2024 FOR THE O/P/U/S 8C, 22C NDPS ACT, 1985 AND 14 OF FOREIGNERS ACT 1946, REGISTERED BY THE HEBBAGODI P.S PENDING ON THE FILE OF 8TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE (NDPS), BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE.

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶21

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC:25727 CRL.P No. 4893 of 2025

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Accused no.12 in Spl.C.No.741/2024 pending before the Court of VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge & Spl. Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.329/2024 registered by Hebbagodi Police Station, Bengaluru District, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C), 22(c) of NDPS Act, 1985, and Section 14 of Foreigners Act, 1946, is before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking regular bail.

¶26

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶27

FIR in Crime No.329/2024 was registered by Hebbagodi

¶28

Police Station, Bengaluru District, initially for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(b), 22(C), 22(A), 27(B), 25, 27 of NDPS Act, and Sections 290, 294 of IPC, against Vasu and others based on the first information dated 21.05.2024 received from Mohammed Mukaram, Police Inspector attached to Drugs Prevention Squad, CCB, Bengaluru City. During the course of investigation of the case, petitioner herein was arrested on 12.06.2024 and subsequently remanded to judicial custody. After completing investigation, charge sheet has been

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:25727 CRL.P No. 4893 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

filed against 13 persons and petitioner is arrayed as accused no.12 in the charge sheet. His bail application filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court in Crl. Misc. No.2693/2024 was rejected on 03.02.2025. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court.

¶32

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner who has no other criminal antecedents is in custody for the last more than one year. In the FIR registered in the present case, petitioner is not arrayed as an accused. Subsequently, based on the confession statement of the co-accused, he has been arrested in the present case. Trial in the case is yet to commence. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶33

Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the petition, submits that petitioner is a foreigner who did not have valid documents to stay in India. Commercial quantity of contraband article has been seized from his possession, and therefore, his bail application is liable to be rejected.

¶34

The material on record would go to show that based on the credible information received on 19.05.2024, that a rave

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:25727 CRL.P No. 4893 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

party was arranged at G.R.Farms within the limits of Electronic City Police Station for the purpose of celebrating the birthday of one Vasu, a raid was conducted to the alleged spot and the police had arrested some of the accused named in the FIR and from their possession, contraband articles were seized.

¶38

Based on the confession statement of accused nos.9 & 10, petitioner herein was arrested on 12.06.2024 and from his possession 49.6 grams of contraband article allegedly MDMA ecstasy pills were recovered and subjected to panchanama. In the charge sheet which is now filed after completing investigation, petitioner is arrayed as accused no.12. The seized contraband article has tested positive for the drug known as MDMA and 49.6 grams of MDMA is considered as commercial quantity under the relevant notification issued under the provisions of the NDPS Act.

¶39

The alleged offences could be punishable upto 20 years of imprisonment. It is not in dispute that petitioner who is a foreigner had no valid documents to stay in India as on the date of his arrest. Though petitioner was arrested based on the confession statement of accused nos.9 & 10, from his

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:25727 CRL.P No. 4893 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

possession, commercial quantity of contraband article has been seized, which would prima facie go to show that the alleged offences get attracted against the petitioner. Merely for the reason that investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed, the same cannot be a ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶43

Petitioner who is a foreigner, has failed to give valid explanation for he overstaying in India after his Visa had expired, and on other hand, he was found to be indulging in trafficking of drugs and from his possession, commercial quantity of contraband article has been seized. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that petitioner's prayer for grant of regular bail needs to be rejected at this stage. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.

¶44

Sd /- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶45

Augustine Dada v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Augustine Dada v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarthak Sharma Vs State of Karnataka

Selvamani S Vs the State of Karnataka

Ashrapul Sardar Vs State of Karnataka by

Manjunath H B Vs State by Mandya Rural Police

Shivam Singh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Madhu @ Madhukirana Vs the State of Karnataka