In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for an alleged NDPS offence, the High Court held that Section 37 of the NDPS Act bars bail because the petitioner's criminal antecedents indicate he is likely to commit further offences, despite lacking direct possession of contraband.
Prayer for release on bail is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BLAPL No.612 of 2021
4 15.4.2021 The petitioner has prayed for his release on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with Machkund P.S.Case No.80 dated 30.9.2018 corresponding to T.R.Case No.35 of 2018 pending in the court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Koraput for alleged commission of offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C)/29 of the NDPS Act.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that, he is no way related to commission of offences as no contraband was seized from his possession nor he was present at the spot at the time of detection of the offence. It is also submitted that, basing on the statement of the co-accused person, he has been falsely implicated in the case.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that, this petitioner has eleven number of criminal antecedents including the offences under the NDPS Act and therefore, the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act for release on bail of the petitioner will operate.
On perusal of the copy of the F.I.R. and chargsheet as filed by the petitioner, it reveals that one ‘ Eicher Truck’ was detected by Machakund Police while transporting 2814 Kg. of ganja and as per the allegations, one Bhaktaram Changudia @ Rahul was transporting the aforesaid quantity of contraband in the truck by escorting the same in another vehicle. Though said Bhaktaram managed to escape from the spot, but was apprehended by the police later and as per his statement, the present petitioner was implicated. The F.I.R. allegation speaks the name of the petitioner directly that he is the master mind in
transportation of such amount of contraband from Chitrakonda area to Jagdalpur.
The submissions of the learned counsel of the petitioner is found true on perusal of the copy of the chargsheet that direct possession of contraband was not found from the petitioner and he has been implicated on the statement of co-accused Bhaktaram. The petitioner being arrested in connection G.R.Case No.496 of 2019 has been taken to custody on remand in the present case on 13.12.2019.
Coming to examine the bar prescribed under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act, release of the accused on bail in the offence concerning commercial quantity, the requirements to be satisfied are that, there must be reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and secondly, he is not likely to committee any offence while on bail.
So far as the first requirement is concerned, though there seems reasonable grounds in favour of the petitioner as the only available material against him is the statement of the co-accused Bhakatram. But the second requirement that he would not likely committee any other offence while on bail is not found satisfied in view of the criminal antecedents reported against the petitioner. The rejection order dated 2.11.2020 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Koraput shows that out of such eleven number of previous cases, at least four are relating to offences under the N.D.P.S. Act. Therefore, by any stretch of imagination, it is not possible to believe on the part of the petitioner that he would not committee any further offence while on bail.
So keeping in view the reported antecedents against him, Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act operates as a bar to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial for completion of the same as soon as possible.
As the restriction due to COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020.
……….…………………..
B.P.Routray, J.
c
c
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 37 of the NDPS Act bars bail despite lack of direct possession of contraband due to criminal antecedents.
Whether the petitioner satisfies the requirement of not being likely to commit further offences while on bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State
B. Routray
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
