Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Advs.Sri.R.Bindu (Sasthamangalam) on 20 June, 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 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 31ST JYAISHTA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 3284 of 2018
CRIME NO. 812/2017 OF KASABA POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED
FASALU
AGED 30, S/O. ABDURAHMAN, FATHIMAS, MULLA VEETTIL HOUSE,
THIRUVANNUR (P.O), KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM)
SRI.PRASANTH M.P
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.ANAS K.A
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-06-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
AD
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J
--------------------------------------------
B.A No.3284 of 2018
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2018
ORDER
1. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.812 of 2017 of Kasaba Police Station, registered under Sections 20(b)(ii)(A), 21(b) and 22(c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
3. According to the prosecution, on 23.12.2017, information was received by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kasba Police Station, that the applicant was dealing with narcotic substances. They reached the spot and intercepted the applicant. A search was conducted after complying with all statutory formalities. From a bag found in the possession of the applicant, 29.5 gms of Hashish, 15.5 gms of Cocaine and 54 LSD stamps weighing 1 gm were detected. The contraband articles were sampled and sealed and later the Crime was registered after arresting the applicant.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that final report has been laid by the investigating agency B.A No.3284 of 2018 2 without even obtaining the report of chemical analysis. As on date, there are no materials to show that what has been seized from the possession of the applicant is either LSD or any other contraband substance. According to the learned counsel, his further detention in custody would result in failure of justice. It is further submitted that the investigation having been completed, it is only just and proper that the applicant be released on bail.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor while opposing the prayer submitted that earnest efforts are being taken to get the report of chemical analysis as expeditiously as possible. A preliminary test was conducted by the detecting officer and he has concluded that what has been seized from the possession are narcotic substances. As and when report is received from the Chemical Examiner's Lab, the same would be submitted before the trial court is the submission. It is further submitted that final report was laid on 14.6.2018 within the statutory period of 180 days taking note of the gravity of the offence committed by the applicant. It is further submitted that commercial quantity of LSD along with a cocktail of other drugs were seized from the possession of the applicant herein. It is further urged that the parameters laid down in Section 37 of the B.A No.3284 of 2018 3 NDPS Act, 1985 will have to be satisfied as the quantity seized is commercial in nature. Highlighting the deleterious effects and deadly impact of the substance, it is submitted that the legislature has included Section 37 in the Statute Book to deter such nefarious activities. The learned Public Prosecutor referred to the decisions of the Apex Court in Union of India (UOI) v. Shri Shiv Shanker Kesari [(2007) 7 SCC 798] and Union of India v. Ram Samujh and Another [(1999) 9 SCC 429] to support his contentions.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the materials on record.
7. The jurisdiction of the court to grant bail is circumscribed by the provision of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Bail can be granted in a case where there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. It is the mandate of the legislature which is required to be followed. The expression used in Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the Act is b