Allowed

Shijil T a v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2021Bail Appl./1464/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed regular bail applications filed by five accused persons under the NDPS Act. Finding insufficient incriminating material collected by the police contrary to prosecution assertions and noting no prior antecedents, the court directed release on bail with significant conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- each with two solvent sureties for Rs. 1,00,000/-.

Shijil T a Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.1606 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.687/2020 OF MARADU POLICE STATION , Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 SHEMEER A.K AGED 27 YEARS SON OF KABEER, PATHUKUDIYIL NHAMANGHAT P.O, VYLATHUR, NHAMANGHAT, THRISSUR 679563

¶9

2 SIYAD AGED 23 YEARS SON OF PAREEKUTTY, UNIKANDATH HOUSE, THOZHIYOOR, VADAKKEKAD, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR 680520

¶10

3 SHAMEEL T.S. AGED 26 YEARS SON OF SHAMSHUDHEEN, THIYYATHEYIL, THOZHIYOOR, VADAKKEKAD, CHAVAKKAD, THIRSSUR 680520

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.S.A.ANAND SRI.JAYAN KUTTICHAKKU

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031

¶14

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SMT.V.SREEJA -PP

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1464/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Bail Appl..Nos.1606 & 1464 OF 2021

¶19

¶20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶21

PRESENT

¶22

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶23

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶24

Bail Appl..No.1464 OF 2021

¶25

CRIME NO.687/2020 OF MARADU POLICE STATION , Ernakulam

¶26

PETITIONER/S:

¶27

SHIJIL T A AGED 29 YEARS THAYAMKULAM HOUSE, VADAKKEKADU, NEAR RAHATH MAZJID THRISSUR DISTRICT 679562

¶28

BY ADV. SRI.IEANS.C.CHAMAKKALA

¶29

RESPONDENT/S:

¶30

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031

¶31

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.V.SREEJA -PP

¶32

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1606/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

Bail Appl..Nos.1606 & 1464 OF 2021

¶34

¶35

COMMON ORDER

¶36

[ Bail Appl..1606/2021, Bail Appl..1464/2021 ]

¶37

Dated this the 1st day of March 2021

¶38

Applications for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicants in B.A. No.1606/2021 are accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 while the applicant in B.A. No.1464/2021 is the 3^rd accused in Crime No.687/2020 of Maradu Police Station for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Section 22C r/w Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶39

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17.12.2020 the applicants were allegedly travelling in a car bearing registration No.KL 46 U 9616 with packets of Mescaline, which was subsequently identified as Methamphetamine and they were attempting to handover the said packets to accused Nos.5 to 9, when the police patrolling party closed on them. The car was allegedly parked near the gate of Vismaya Apartment, Vyttila. On seeing the police party, one of the accused threw two packets and on the police party reached there, they found two packets

¶40

¶41

Bail Appl..Nos.1606 & 1464 OF 2021

¶42

lying under the street light. The person who had allegedly thrown the articles under the street light was not identified.

¶43

The applicants state that they are innocent and the allegations are not true. The car in which they were travelling was thoroughly searched and no suspicious article or contraband or any other incriminating substance was seized from the car. Accused 5 to 9 had approached the Session Court and were granted bail. The bail applications filed the applicants were rejected by the court. The applicants state that they are similarly placed as accused Nos.5 to 9 and that there has been nothing incriminating against the applicants and therefore they are entitled to bail.

¶44

Heard the learned counsels appearing for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶45

It is pertinent to note that the FIR was initially registered under Section 102 of Cr.P.C., which indicated that the police suspected commission of crime, but what crime was not revealed at that point in time. Subsequently, the applicants were all taken into custody, questioned and the packets which were found under the street light was opened from the scene of occurrence and found to be containing something suspicious. They were all

¶46

¶47

Bail Appl..Nos.1606 & 1464 OF 2021

¶48

taken to the police station and the mahazar was prepared from the police station about 14 hours later. There is no materials collected by the police even with the help of the CCTV camera which was available, to indicate that accused Nos.1 to 4 had come there to sell or hand over the contraband articles seized to accused Nos.5 to 9 as is alleged by the prosecution.

¶49

Under the circumstances, it will have to be held at least for the meanwhile that there is no incriminating materials collected by the prosecution against the applicants. They are no way different from accused Nos.5 to 9. It is only an assumption that they had come there to sell or handover the contraband articles seized to accused Nos.5 to 9 and that they were purchasers of the articles. Under the circumstances, I find that there are no justification in declining bail to the applicants herein. There are reasonable grounds to believe that they are not guilty and they have no antecedents. There is no possibility of their committing similar offences while on bail. The twin conditions required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is satisfied. Hence the applicants are directed to be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh only) each with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the

¶50

Bail Appl..Nos.1606 & 1464 OF 2021

¶51

¶52

jurisdictional court and on following conditions:-

¶53

(i) They shall appear before the investigating officer on all

¶54

Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of three months or till the filing of final report whichever is earlier.

¶55

(ii) They shall not get involved in similar cases during the currency of the bail.

¶56

(iii) They shall not tamper with evidence, intimidate or influence the witnesses .

¶57

In case of violation of the bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

SD/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

rmm

Shijil T a v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shijil T a 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

Aboobacker Vs State of Kerala

Sakir P Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu Radhakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Shoukkath Vs State of Kerala

Subaidha Vs State of Kerala