Kerala High Court
Vishal vs State Of Kerala on 11 October, 2018
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 19TH ASWINA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 6849 of 2018
CRIME NO. 2130/2018 OF CHANGANASSERY POLICE STATION,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
VISHAL, AGED 25 YEARS,
S/O. BABU, RESIDING AT ATTUPURATH VEETTIL,
PERUMPUZHAKADAVU, PERUNNA PADINHARE KARAYIL,
CHANGANACHERY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 101
BY ADV. SRI.K.SHAJ
RESPONDENT/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 31
2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHANGANACHERY POLICE STATION,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA-686101.
BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This application is filed under §439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.2130 of 2018 registered at the Changanachery Police Station under §20(b) BA:6849/18 2
(ii) (A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and §77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
3. According to the prosecution, secret information was received that the applicant herein was dealing with narcotic substances. The Sub Inspector of Police, Changanachery proceeded to the spot and intercepted the applicant, who was standing near to the Revenue Tower, Changanachery. According to the prosecution, after informing the applicant of his rights, a search was conducted and about 5 small packets of dry Ganja containing 5 gms each were seized from his pocket. From the tuft of his dhothi, 230 gms of Ganja was detected. He was arrested and the contraband substances were seized. Specific allegation is that he had possessed the Ganja for the purpose of selling it to juveniles.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant contended that the Section 50 of the Act has been blatantly violated by the detecting officer. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in custody from 24.9.2018 and prays that he be released on bail.
5. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor who has opposed the prayer.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced and have BA:6849/18 3 gone through the case diary which was made available. Section 50 of the NDPS Act provides that when any officer duly authorised under S.42 is about to search any person under the provisions of S.41, S.42 or S.43, he shall, if such person so requires, take such person without unnecessary delay to the nearest Gazetted Officer of any of the departments mentioned in S.42 or to the nearest Magistrate. Though it appears that the accused was informed of his right, the search has not been conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. Be that as it may, it appears that the investigation has made much headway. No other crimes are reported against the applicant. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that by imposing stringent conditions, he can be enlarged on bail.
7. In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant herein shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:
1). The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for a period of three months or till final report is filed, BA:6849/18 4 whichever is earlier.
2). He shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
3).He shall not commit any offence while on bail.
4). He shall not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport, shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week; If release of the passport is required at a later period, the applicant shall be at liberty to move appropriate application before the Court having jurisdiction.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE krj