Allowed

Vignesh.H.Venki v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Sept 2016Bail Appl./6676/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed bail to the petitioner, the second accused in an NDPS case involving ganja possession. The court granted bail on conditions including police reporting, territorial restrictions, and a security deposit, noting the prejudice caused by mixed seizure quantities.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with conditions: police reporting, territorial restrictions, security deposit, and no further NDPS offences.

Vignesh.H.Venki Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/5TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6676 of 2016 ()

¶6

------------------------------CRIME NO. 658/2016 OF AROOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶8

VIGNESH.H.VENKI, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.HARIHARAN,5C,NAKSHTRAMALIKA FLAT, KOCHI CORPORATION, KUNJAN BAVA ROAD, PONNURUNNY, VYTILA-682 019, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.C.ANILKUMAR (KALLESSERIL) SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR SRI.P.M.MANASH

¶10

RESPONDENT/-COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, (REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AROOR POLICE STATION-CR.NO.658/2016 OF AROOR POLICE STATION), REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAJJU.S.

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

P. UBAID, J

B.A.No.6676 of 2016

Dated this the 27^th day of September, 2016

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner herein is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.658/2016 of the Aroor Police Station, registered under Section 20(b)(ii)B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short, 'the NDPS Act'). He seeks regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The application filed by him for regular bail was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Alappuzha, on 02.09.2016. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 12.08.2016.

¶20

The prosecution case is that on 12.08.2016 this petitioner and the 1^st accused were found possessing some quantity of ganja for illicit sale. They were arrested on the spot, and a quantity of 1.1 kg of ganja was seized as per mahazar. The FIR shows that ganja was seen possessed by both the accused, but the FIR or seizure mahazar does not show what quantity was actually seized from the 1^st accused, or what quantity was seized from the 2^nd accused. The quantity seized from the two accused was mixed together by the police, and it was weighed. Failure on the part of the

¶21

B.A.Nos.6676 of 2016 2

¶22

police to specify the actual quantity seized each accused will cause prejudice to the accused. Anyway, in the present circumstances where investigation is practically over. I feel it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶23

In the result, this application for bail is allowed. The petitioner will be released on bail on her executing a bond with two solvent sureties for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. Bail is granted on condition that;

¶24

a. The petitioner shall report before the Circle Inspector of Police, Cherthala, between 10 am to 11 am on all Mondays for a period of two months.

¶25

b. The petitioner shall not enter the jurisdictional limits of Aroor Police Station for two months.

¶26

c. The petitioner shall not leave the Alappuzha revenue district till trial of the case is over, unless otherwise permitted by the trial court in due course of trial, for sufficient reasons.

¶27

d. The petitioner shall make a security deposit of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) in the court below as a further condition for bail. The amount of security

¶28

¶29

B.A.Nos.6676 of 2016

¶30

deposit will be released on conclusion of trial. It will be subject to forfeiture in case of absence during trial without sufficient reason.

¶31

e. The petitioner shall not involve in any offence punishable under the NDPS Act, till trial of the case is over.

¶32

Forward a copy of this order to the Circle Inspector of Police, Cherthala, who will report compliance of conditions to the learned Magistrate.

¶33

Sd/P.UBAID, JUDGE

¶34

¶35

// True Copy // P.A. to Judge

Vignesh.H.Venki v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vignesh.H.Venki v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Udayakumar Vs State of Kerala

Lathika Vs State of Kerala

Santhakumar S. Vs State of Kerala

Faizal Vs State of Kerala

Soji Vs State of Kerala

Rameez Sainulabdeen @ Abu Vs State of Kerala