Allowed

Nabeel v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2021Bail Appl./631/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the bail application of an accused charged with possession of small and intermediary quantities of narcotic drugs. The court held that Section 37 restrictions did not apply due to lack of evidence proving the accused was part of the drug distribution conspiracy.

What did the court decide?

The bail application is allowed; the applicant is directed to be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount each.

Nabeel 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 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.631 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.324/2020 OF CBCID, IDUKKI , Idukki

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

NABEEL AGED 36 YEARS KALLUNKAL HOUSE, EDAPPAL VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM 679576

¶9

BY ADVS. SRUTHY N. BHAT SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.) SRI.P.M.RAFIQ SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN SRI.AJEESH K.SASI SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN SRI.V.C.SARATH SMT.POOJA PANKAJ

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR)-PETR, SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.02.2021, THE COURT ON 15.03.2021 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BA 631/2021

ASHOK MENON, J.

BA No.631 of 2021

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2021

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Application for regular bail under Section 439

¶22

of the Cr.P.C.

¶23

The applicant is the 3rd accused in Crime No.324/2020/CB/IDK/R/2020 of Crime Branch, Idukki (Originally registered as Crime No.597/2020 of

¶24

Vagamon Police Station), for offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(A), 22(a,(b) & (c), 27 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶25

The prosecution case, in brief, is thus:

¶26

on getting information about a D.J. party being organised in a resort named the Cliff Inn at Vagamon, the Inspector of Police reached there on

¶27

¶28

BA 631/2021

¶29

20/12/2020 and conducted a search between 22:30 hours on that day extending up to 5:00 hours on 21/12/2020. Various quantities of Ecstasy Pills, Ecstasy Powder, hashish, L.S.D stamps, charas, MDMA and Ganja were seized from each of the accused. It is contended that the D.J. party was arranged by the accused for the consumption, sale and distribution of the aforementioned narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, and information was passed to all by means of a WhatsApp group named and styled as 'AADRAADRA'. It is alleged that it

¶30

was the result of a conspiracy hatched by all the participants.

¶31

Applicant was staying in a room from where 1.10 grams of Charas and 27 LSD Stamps weighing 52

¶32

mgs were seized from the applicant. He was arrested on the aforesaid date and remanded to judicial custody. The seizures included small quantity,

¶33

¶34

BA 631/2021

¶35

intermediary quantity and commercial quantity of narcotics from the several accused.

¶36

The applicant states that he is innocent

¶37

and that he had only participated in the DJ Party, but was not in possession of any contraband as alleged. Even if the allegation is to be believed, he was in possession of only a small quantity of cannabis and an intermediary quantity of LSD. The applicant has no antecedents and hence seeks bail.

¶38

The learned Public prosecutor, under

¶39

instructions from the Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Idukki has vehemently opposed the

¶40

bail stating that the applicant and the other accused are part of a larger network and that the narcotics were brought from Bangalore and distributed among the members of the group. Since

¶41

they are part of the conspiracy, each one of them is liable for the entire quantity of drugs seized.

¶42

¶43

BA 631/2021

¶44

Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri

¶45

P.Vijayabhanu appearing for applicant instructed by Advocate Ms.Sruthy N.Bhat. The learned Sr. Public Prosecutor Sri. Santhosh Peter was heard on behalf of the State. Records perused.

¶46

The learned Senior Counsel Sri.Vijayabhanu

¶47

submits that applicant had gone to the resort to spend some time. He has no connection with the WhatsApp group and has nothing to do with the DJ party. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and that the contraband seized from him is only a small and intermediary quantity. Hence, he is entitled to be released on bail.

¶48

After having heard the submissions and

¶49

gone through the objections filed by the

¶50

prosecution, I find that there is no substantial evidence collected against the applicant to indicate that he is a member of the group which had

¶51

BA 631/2021

¶52

¶53

hatched a conspiracy to use, sell and distribute narcotic drugs or any psychotropic substance. The accused were also not found together and there is no indication of any communication among them. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act may not be attracted as against the applicant, as he was in possession of only a small quantity of Charas and an intermediary quantity of LSD. The F.I.R indicates the inclusion of offences for possession of small, intermediary and commercial quantities of Narcotic and psychotropic substances. For the possession of Charas, there is only the inclusion of Section 20(b)(ii)(A) and for possession of LSD, an offence under Section 22(b) is what is found applicable to the applicant.

¶54

Section 37(1)(b) prescribes restrictions on granting bail only in cases of offences under

¶55

¶56

BA 631/2021

¶57

Sections 19, 24 and 27A and for offences involving commercial quantity. The applicant has only committed offences punishable under Section 20(b) (ii)(A) and Section 22(b), for possession of small and intermediate quantities of Ganja and LSD, respectively. It is true that Section 29 is incorporated, but there are no materials available at present to indicate that the applicant was part of the conspiracy. Under the circumstances, there is no embargo in granting bail to the applicant.

¶58

Resultantly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on the execution of a bond for ₹ 1,00,000/(Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties

¶59

for the like amount each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, and on following further conditions:

¶60

1.He shall appear before the investigating

¶61

BA 631/2021

¶62

¶63

officer as and when called for and cooperate with the investigation;

¶64

2.He shall not get involved in any crime of similar nature during the bail period;

¶65

3.He shall not tamper with evidence, influence or intimidate witnesses.

¶66

In the event of a breach of the above conditions,

¶67

the prosecution shall be at liberty to approach the

¶68

jurisdictional Court for cancellation of the bail.

¶69

Sd/-

¶70

ASHOK MENON JUDGE

¶71

Nabeel v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nabeel 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

Nidheesh C.R. Vs State of Kerala

Vipin Das Vs State of Kerala

P.M. Muhammed Subair Vs State of Kerala

Adon Vincent Vs State of Kerala

Remani Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar Vs State of Kerala