Dismissed

Ahamed Salim @ Ahammed Salih v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Jul 2021Bail Appl./4943/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed bail applications filed by two accused persons in an NDPS case. The court held that despite the absence of drugs from their possession, their travel with others found possessing large quantities of narcotic drugs indicated a criminal conspiracy, attracting Section 37 embargo.

What did the court decide?

Bail applications dismissed due to reasons for believing conspiracy and applicability of NDPS Sec. 37 embargo.

Ahamed Salim @ Ahammed Salih 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 K.HARIPAL

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 4943 OF 2021

¶5

IN CRIME NO.139/2021 OF KALPAKANCHERI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶6

APPLICANT/5TH ACCUSED:

¶7

AHAMED SALIM @ AHAMMED SALIH AGED 21 YEARS KAITHAKKATTIL HOUSE, THAZHE KOZHICHENA, VALAKKULAM POST MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676508 BY ADV T.K.AJITH KUMAR

¶8

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶10

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.07.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..5071/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

B.A.Nos.4943 and 5071 OF 2021

¶12

¶13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶14

PRESENT

¶15

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL THURSDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 5071 OF 2021 IN CRIME NO.139/2021 OF KALPAKANCHERI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶16

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3:

¶17

RAMEEZ SUSHAD AGED 24 YEARS S/O.MOOSA, KOZHIKKAL HOUSE, KOZHICHENA, VALAKKULAM POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. RAFEEK. V.K. SAIJO HASSAN BENOJ C AUGUSTIN U.M.HASSAN P.PARVATHY MANAS P HAMEED

¶18

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶19

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682 031.

¶20

SR.PP - SRI. SANTHOSH PETER

¶21

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.07.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4943/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

B.A.Nos.4943 and 5071 OF 2021

¶23

¶24

ORDER

¶25

These are applications for regular bail moved by accused Nos.5

¶26

and 3 respectively, in Crime No.139/2021 of Kalpakanchery Police Station in Malappuram district. The crime was registered on 22.05.2021 alleging offence punishable under Sections 22(b), 22(c), 29 and 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act. There are five accused in the crime.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioners fervently submitted

¶28

that both the petitioners are innocent, they happened to travel in the car along with the other accused who carried offensive substances; the counsel for the third accused submitted that the car was driven by the third accused, the other accused were carried in the vehicle without knowing the items possessed by them in their personal custody.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner in bail application No.4943/2021 has submitted that he is only 21 years old, he was about to move to United States to join his father, that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶30

The learned Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the

¶31

applications. The crime was registered after seizing 100gms of ganja

¶32

B.A.Nos.4943 and 5071 OF 2021

¶33

¶34

and 97gms of MDMA from the possession of accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively. Four of the accused were found inside the car driven by the petitioner in B.A.No.5071/2021. The prosecution has strong reasons to suspect criminal conspiracy having been hatched by them in carrying the items and thus Section 29 of the NDPS Act also is invoked.

¶35

The crime was registered on 22.05.2021. Going by the first information report, that day the Inspector of police got reliable information that four persons who had arrived by car bearing registration No.KL-65 M 3339 and one person who had reached at the spot of detection by motorcycle bearing registration No. KL-55 W-6874 were engaged in illegal sale of narcotic drugs. He reached near the KSEB office at 18:40 hours, found four persons sitting inside the car and another person sitting on a motor cycle nearby, both stationary. Later, after alerting them, their body was searched in the presence of the Excise Circle Inspector, Tirur. On body search, Muhammed Shabeeb, the first accused who travelled on the front left side of the car, carried among other things 85gms of MDMA and 100gms of ganja in his possession. Other persons in the car did not carry any offensive articles. On body search of the motorcyclist, who

¶36

B.A.Nos.4943 and 5071 OF 2021

¶37

¶38

is the second accused, he carried 12 gms of MDMA in his possession.

¶39

Thus, after seizing 97gms of MDMA and 100gms of ganja, all of them were arrested from the spot. This is the sum and substance of the prosecution case.

¶40

After hearing counsel on both sides, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. It is true that no offensive substance was seized from the possession of the petitioners. But there were reasons to believe that all were moving together and were engaged in illegal transaction of narcotic drugs. Except the second accused, all were inside the car. From the materials available before Court, at least at this stage, it cannot be inferred that they were not parties to a conspiracy. It is clearly alleged that they all are guilty of the criminal conspiracy hatched by them, and narcotic drugs were carried by accused Nos. 1 and 2 pursuant to the conspiracy hatched by them. In the circumstances, embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is attracted and they cannot be granted bail.

¶41

The applications are dismissed.

¶42

Sd/- K.HARIPAL JUDGE

¶43

Jms/22.07 //True Copy// P.A to Judge

Ahamed Salim @ Ahammed Salih v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahamed Salim @ Ahammed Salih 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

Sunny T.J. Vs State of Kerala

Nitin Pushpan Vs State of Kerala Represnted by SHO Thodupuzha Police Station Idukki District

Shafeek Vs State of Kerala

Manoj Mohan Vs State of Kerala

Arun Vs State of Kerala

Sreemon@Sreekuttan Vs State of Kerala