Karnataka High Court
Noushad Mannakkam Valli vs Union Of India on 16 September, 2020
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3401/2020
BETWEEN:
NOUSHAD MANNAKKAM VALLI,
S/O USMAN MANNAKKAM VALLI,
AGED 25 YEARS,
R/AT NELLIKUTH, PAYYANAD,
MALAPURAM, KERALA - 676 122
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI GANGADHARAPPA C.C, ADVOCATE)
AND:
UNION OF INDIA
NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU
BENGALURU ZONAL UNIT
BENGALURU - 560 063.
(REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECTOR)
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MADHUKAR DESHPANDE,
STANDING COUNSEL)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER
ON BAIL IN NCB.F.No.48/1/03/2019/BZU, BENGALURU
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 8(c) R/W. 20(b)(ii)(c), 21(b),
22(c), 27A, 27B, 28 AND 29 OF NDPS ACT, WHICH IS
2
PENDING IN SPL.C.C. No.1106/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE
HON'BLE XXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AND SPL. JUDGE FOR NDPS BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE AT
BENGALURU MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This matter is taken up through Video Conference today.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Gangadharappa C.C., for petitioner and Sri.Madhukar Deshpande, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent through V.C.
3. The petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., wherein the petitioner seeks for grant of bail in NCB.F.NO.48/1/03/2019/BZU, Bengaluru for the offence P/U/S. 8(c) R/W. 20(b)(ii)(c), 21(b), 22(c), 27A, 27B, 28 and 29 of NDPS ACT, which is pending in SPL.C.C. NO.1106/2019 on the file of the Hon'ble 3 XXXIII Additional City Civil And Sessions Judge and Special Judge for NDPS, Bengaluru.
4. The substance of the case is as follows:
It is stated that the complainant received credible information on 22.03.2019, at about 11.45 hours, to the effect that two persons by name Nausheer Mohammed and Naushad with passport Numbers N0771023 and P3227632 were traveling to Doha through Oman Airways departing at 3.15 p.m., from Kempegowda International Airport, Bengaluru. They were likely to be in possession of Amphetamine, Hashish and cocaine concealed in their baggages. Immediately, the complainant recorded the same in the form of NCB-1 Information report under Section-
42. It was submitted to the Superintendent, NCB Bengaluru, and direction was sought.4
5. The complainant was permitted to intercept the suspect at Kempegowda International Airport Bengaluru. The complainant constituted a team. They went in a Departmental vehicle along with laptop, portable printer, sealing machine, weighing machine, DD Kits and reached the spot at around 13.00 hrs and checked the time of the departure of Oman Airways Flight and learnt that Flight No.Wy284 is to depart from Bengaluru at about 15.15 hours and its check-in has started.
6. The complainant is team secured two persons namely, Sri.Muniyappa and Sri.Dyavappa, and got identified themselves and the purpose of their visit and requested them to be as independent witnesses.
7. The complainant also state about the information received by them regarding the illegal 5 possession of the contraband as stated above. Then, the complainant is team with witnesses enquired about the said two persons and came to know that they have checked in and they were informed that the said persons have already reported and checked in their baggages. The NCB team then moved to the immigration officials. They shared the information to the immigration officials and they were informed that Noushad Mannakkamvalli had cleared immigration and they also stated that the other person has been examined by immigration and has not yet cleared immigration.
8. Then the said persons were intercepted by the NCB team and on being asked they revealed their names and told that they were proceeding to Doha by Oman Airways. The complainant showed his identity card and thereafter asked them to give their ID Cards, and passports. Both of them were looking nervous. 6 NCB officials informed them about the information received and also introduced the two witnesses. Oman Airways officials were requested to bring the baggages of both passengers. They were secured and produced before Nousheer Muhammed and Noushad Mannakkamvalli.
9. A backpack, black and pink in colour had the baggage tag in the name of Nousheer Muhammed. It had a marking 'ENO' in orange color. Another dark blue backpack with yellow marking 'Eb ENO' on it.
Both Nousheer Muhammed and Noushad Mannakkamvalli claimed their respective baggages voluntarily.
10. First Nousheer Muhammed was requested to open and show the contents of his backpack and Noushad Mannakkamvalli was asked to remain present along with his baggage until the search of other bag is completed. Nousheer Muhammed started 7 taking out the contents of his baggage which contained his clothes and toiletries. Later he took out one pink colored quilt. Carrying such quilt along with few clothes in one bag to a foreign country gave rise to suspicion. Because of this suspicions, the quilt was examined thoroughly by touching and gently pressing.
11. On doing so, the presence of some hard materials concealed inside the quilt was felt. Then the quilt was cut open to check the suspicious materials concealed inside. Upon cutting open the quilt, ten transparent polythene pouches containing some white crystalline substance were found. There was also a small transparent polythene cover, which contained white colored powder. On being questioned, he replied that the substance in 10 polythene packets is Amphetamine and the white coloured powder in the other polythene packet is cocaine. They were tested with the help of equipments carried by them and the 8 tests was positive for Amphetamine. Since the baggages were similar in appearance, texture, packing and also answered positive for Amphetamine, it was decided to transfer the white crystalline substance from all the ten polythene packets into a bigger transparent polythene pouch. An empty bigger transparent polythene pouch was weighed and the weight came out to be 25 grams. Then the white crystalline substance from all the ten polythene packets was transferred into the bigger transparent polythene pouch and weighed and the weight came out to be 990 gram. Therefore, the net weight of the white crystalline substance believed to be Amphetamine is 965 grams and marked as P1. Two representative samples of 5 grams each were drawn from P1 and put into two separate zip locked transparent polythene pouches, further put inside a paper envelope, pasted and wax sealed. The 9 description of the contents of the envelope was written on the same and the envelopes were marked as S1 and S2. The remaining white crystalline substance in P1 weighing 955 gram was heat sealed in the same transparent polythene pouch, put inside a paper envelope, pasted, and wax sealed. The description of the contents of the envelope was written on the same and the envelope was marked as P1.
12. Secondly, testing of the white coloured powder in another polythene packet was taken up. A small pinch of the white coloured powder from another polythene packet was tested with field Drug Detection Kit. The test answered positive for 'cocaine' test. On reasonable belief, the white coloured powder believed to be concaine was seized along with the packing material. An empty transparent polythene pouch was weighed and the weight came out to be 1 gram. Then 10 the white coloured powder was transferred into the empty transparent polythene pouch and weighed. The weight came out to be 31 gram. Therefore, the net weight of the white coloured powder believed to be cocaine is 30 gram and marked as P2. Two representative samples of 5 grams each were drawn from P2 and put into two separate zip locked transparent polythene pouches, further put inside a paper envelope, pasted, and wax sealed. The description of the contents of the envelope was written on the same and the envelopes were marked as S3 and S4. The remaining white coloured powder in P2 weighing 20 gram was heat sealed in the same transparent polythene pouch, put inside a paper envelope, pasted, and wax sealed. The description of the contents of the envelope was written on the same and the envelope was marked as P2. The packing material used for packing Amphetamine and cocaine 11 were also put inside one brown colored envelope, pasted and wax sealed. The description of the content of the envelope was written on the same and the envelope was marked as P3. The bag belonging to Nousheer Muhammed from which the drugs were recovered, was also seized along with his remaining personal belongings including the quilt was kept inside the same bag, stiched with whitle coloured plastic gunny bag and wax sealed. The description of the contents of the white coloured plastic gunny bag was written on the same and the packet was marked as P4. He was also requested to open and show the contents and the same procedure required under law was followed. The contents of his baggage which contained his clothes, toiletries and two Milton branch lunch boxes. When Noushad Mannakkamvalli was asked about the contents of the two lunch boxes, he became more nervous. Because of this, there was 12 suspicion; and therefore he was asked to open the lunch boxes. Both contained some non-vegetarian curry. But on examining the contents of the lunch boxes carefully, some polythene covers were visible. Therefore, on disposing the curry, several polythene packets containing dark brown substance were found and were taken out from both the Milton lunch boxes. On counting, there were 45 such packets. On being asked, he replied that the substance in all the 45 polythene packets in Hashish/Charas. For confirmation, representative sample of dark brown coloured substance from all the '45 polythene packets was tested with field drug detection kit. All the tests answered positive for 'Hashish' test. On reasonable belief, the dark brown coloured substance believed to be Hashish was seized along with the packing material.
13
13. Since all the packets were similar in appearance, texture, packing and also answered positive for Hashish, it was decided to transfer all the dark brown colored substance from all the 45 polythene packets into a bigger transparent polythene pouch. An empty bigger transparent polythene pouch weighed and the weight came out to be 25 gram. Then the dark brown coloured substance from all the 45 polythene packets was transferred into the bigger transparent polythene pouch and weighed. The weight came out to be 4.550 kg. Therefore, the net weight of the white crystalline substance believed to be Hashish in 4.525 kg and marked as P5. Two representative sample of 24 grams each were from P4 and put into two separate zip locked transparent polythene pouches, heath sealed further put inside a paper envelope, pasted and waxed sealed. The description of the contents of the envelopes was written on the 14 same and the envelopes were marked as S5 and S6. The remaining dark brown coloured substance in P5 weighing 4.477 kg was heat sealed in the same transparent polythene pouch, put inside a plastic container, stitched with while marking cloth, and wax sealed. The description of the contents of the plastic box was written on the same and was marked as P5. The packing material used for packing Hashish were also put inside one plastic cover, heat sealed and again put inside green coloured envelope, pasted and wax sealed. The description of the content of the envelope was written on the same and the envelope was marked as P6. The bag belonging to Noushad Mannakkamvalli from which the drugs were recovered, was also seized along with his remaining personal belonging including the lunches boxes and were kept back inside the same bag was stitched with white coloured plastic gunny bag and wax sealed. The 15 description of the contents of the white coloured plastic gunny bag was written on the same and the packet was marked as P7.
14. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Gangadharappa C.C., would submit that the petitioner was framed by accused Nos.3 and 4. As a matter of fact they followed the petitioner up to area and handed over the packets. The petitioner is innocent of the offence. He had no knowledge of the contents. He was supposed to get a job in Oman Airways. He was proceeding for the same. He is in judicial custody for the past 1 ½ years.
15. Learned Standing counsel for respondent sought time on the ground that he got the file only yesterday and he has to go through the file.
16. The learned counsel for the petitioner when the matter was taken up for dictation submitted that 16 he wanted to make further submission and sought for accommodation, which was refused. It is also necessary to mention that previously filed application came to be rejected. However, the same is not mentioned in the papers on questioning by this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it was out of mind.
17. A detailed and meticulous reading of the complaint clearly mentions the procedure being followed as per law. The custody of the petitioner for 1 ½ year cannot be considered as a ground for granting bail, more particularly, considering the nature, gravity and impact of the offence which appears to be serious. Similarly, the offence alleged is not against a particular person, but it is against the entire society.
18. The learned counsel submits that all accused person are on bail except the petitioner and 17 accused No.2 and in the light of the overtacts and possession spoken out by the complainant.
19. Under the over all circumstances, I do not find any ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Even though learned standing counsel for respondent has not made his submission, I find that absolutely there is no ground to consider the bail application in favour of the petitioner. There is no merit. Hence, the petition is rejected.
At this stage, the learned counsel for petitioner submits that the trial judge may be directed for early disposal. In the circumstances, learned Special Judge is directed dispose of the present case as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
JUDGE JJ