Allowed

Sujithlal @ Bilal v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Sept 2021Bail Appl./5998/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a bail application filed by two accused persons arrested under Section 22(b) of the NDPS Act for possessing MDMA, granting release upon execution of a personal bond and surety bond subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners were ordered to be released on bail by executing a bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the same amount, subject to appearing for interrogation and observing standard

Sujithlal @ Bilal Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 5998 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.22/2021 OF Thrissur Excise Range Office, Thrissur

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP 1566/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS

¶8

COURT, THRISSUR

¶9

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶10

1 SUJITHLAL @ BILAL, AGED 28 YEARS S/O. SURESH, THEKKOODAM HOUSE, VIYYUR DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK.

¶11

2 AMAL SHAJU, AGED 21 YEARS S/O. SHAJU, CHITTILAPPILLI HOUSE, KANIMANGALAM DESOM, KANIMANGALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK.

¶12

BY ADVS. VINAY RAMDAS K.B.ANAMIKA

¶13

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶14

STATE OF KERALA

¶15

REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE ENFORCEMENT AND ANTI NARCOTIC SPECIAL SQUAD, THRISSUR THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA – 682031.

¶16

SR. PP SRI. NOUSHAD K.A.

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.5998/2021

ORDER

DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶22

Application for regular bail.

¶23

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 22 of 2021 of Excise Range Office, Thrissur registered for the offences punishable under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'NDPS Act').

¶24

The prosecution allegation is that on 03.07.2021 at 1 p.m. the Excise Inspector attached to Excise Range Office, Thrissur found the petitioners/accused transporting 3.84 grms of MDMA in an autorickshaw bearing Registration No. KL-08-BT3081 in contravention of the provisions of the NDPS Act and thereby they committed the aforesaid offences.

¶25

According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, they

¶26

are totally innocent, but they have been falsely implicated in the

¶27

case by the excise officials.

¶28

B.A.5998/2021

¶29

¶30

The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that though

¶31

the arrest was on 03.07.2021, the investigation could not be concluded till date.

¶32

The quantity involved is greater than the small quantity and less than commercial quantity. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents as reported by the learned Public Prosecutor. As they have been in custody since 03.07.2021 and charge sheet has not been submitted until now, considering the period of detention undergone by them in judicial custody as well the other facts and circumstances involved in this case, I am inclined to release them on bail.

¶33

Therefore, this application is allowed subject to the following conditions:

¶34

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

¶35

B.A.5998/2021

¶36

¶37

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him, in writing.

¶38

(iii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶39

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶40

In case of violation of any of the above conditions,

¶41

the learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in

¶42

accordance with the law.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

SHIRCY V. JUDGE

¶45

Sujithlal @ Bilal v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujithlal @ Bilal 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

Xxx Vs State of Kerala

Biju. G Vs State of Kerala

Viju Vs State of Kerala

Libinlinson Vs State of Kerala

Faizal Vs State of Kerala

Sharafudheen Vs the State of Kerala