Munees Kavil Parambath vs State Of Karnataka on 20 January, 2020

[Cites 4, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

Munees Kavil Parambath vs State Of Karnataka on 20 January, 2020

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                          1



  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020

                       BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA


           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7897 OF 2019


BETWEEN:

MUNEES KAVIL PARAMBATH,
S/O MOHAMMAD ALI THOLAN
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
RESIDING AT SOUDABI MANZIL,
PO MATTUL NORTH,
KANNUR - 670 325.                       ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI MOHAN KUMAR.D., ADVOCATE FOR
 SRI M.KRISHNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY NCB BZU POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.                   ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI MADHUKAR.M.DESHPANDE, CGSC)


     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 OF
CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CRIME No.NCB F.NO.48/1/07/2019 OF NCB, BZU POLICE,
                              2



FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 8(c)
READ WITH SECTIONS 22(c), 23, 28 AND 29 OF
NARCOTICS DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCE ACT,
1985.

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                         ORDER

This criminal petition is filed by accused No.5, in connection with Cr.No.NCB.F.No.48/1/7/2019/BZU registered for the offences under Section 8(3) read with Sections 22(c), 23, 28 and 29 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for respondent.

On behalf of respondent, a detailed statement of objections is filed opposing the petition on the ground that the petitioner is a habitual offender involved in two 3 other cases and the petitioner is facing trial for serious offence of drug trafficking and therefore, he is not entitled to bail.

3. The learned counsel for petitioner has produced copies of the orders passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.4706 of 2019 dated 09.09.2019, Crl.P.No.4944 of 2019 dated 16.09.2019, Crl.P.No.6359 of 2019 dated 11.10.2019, and Crl.P.No.7714 of 2019 dated 08.01.2020, whereby accused Nos.3, 4, 1 and accused No.2 respectively have been enlarged on bail by this Court, subject to certain conditions.

Further allegations made against the petitioner herein is that he is a King-pin and at his instance, the alleged offence is committed. However, there is no specific evidence against the petitioner to show that he stands on a different footing from accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 2 who are admitted to bail by orders of this Court. And hence, on the ground of parity, the petitioner 4 deserves to be admitted to bail, subject to the very same conditions. Hence, the following:

ORDER Petition is allowed. Petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Cr.No.NCB.F.No.48/ 1/7/2019 of NCB, BZU Police, pending on the file of XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Crl.Misc.No.8393 of 2019 for the offences under Section 8(3) read with Sections 22(c), 23, 28 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, subject to the following conditions:

(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.

(ii) He shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) He shall appear before the jurisdictional court on every date of hearing unless exempted by the court for any genuine cause.

(iv) He shall not get himself involved in similar offences.

In the event, the petitioner is found involved in any similar offences, liberty is reserved to the Respondent/Prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail of the petitioner, in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE DH

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court