Karnataka High Court
Swamy Gowda @ Anil vs State By Intelligence Officer on 4 January, 2016
Equivalent citations: 2016 (2) AKR 329, (2016) 3 KCCR 250
Author: A.V.Chandrashekara
Bench: A.V.Chandrashekara
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8186/2015
BETWEEN:
SWAMY GOWDA @ ANIL,
S/O MANJE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
R/AT SHEREHALLI,
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT,
PIN : 573 116.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAGADEESHA.H, ADV.)
AND:
STATE BY INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU,
BENGALURU ZONAL UNIT,
NO. 7/1-2, PRIYANKA VILLAS,
KATTIGENAHALLI, BAGLUR MAIN ROAD,
YELAHANKA,
BENGALURU - 560 063.
REPRESENTED BY THEIR,
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.B.J.ESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
-2-
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL IN NCB.F.NO.48/1/3/2015BZU [SPL.C.C.NO.
436/2015(NCB) ] FOR THE OFFENCES U/S. 8(C) R/W
SECTIONS 22, 27, 27A, 28, 29 AND 32(B)(D) OF NDPS ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. Perused the records.
2. The present petition is filed by this petitioner
- accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in respect of a case registered against the petitioner in NCB.F No.48/1/3/2015/BZU (SPL.C.C.No.436/2015 (NCB) by Narcotics Control Bureau, Bangalore Zonal Unit. After concluding investigation, charge has been filed for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with Sections 22, 27, 27-A, 28, 29 and 32(B)(d) of NDPS Act. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 04.04.2015. -3-
3. The allegation against this petitioner is that on the basis of that on receipt of credible information relating to drug trafficking, they searched the house of the 1st accused N.Babu Kumar at 6.45 p.m., on 26/03/2015. They had received information that he had kept huge quantity of LSDF in liquid form in his house and accused Nos.2 & 3 were assisting him in the said business. It was also disclosed that they were doing business of MDMA and mephedrone.
4. It is alleged that the team of officers of NCB knocked the door of the house of the 1st accused and found all the three accused being present. On inquiry with the 1st accused, it was made known that accused Nos.2 & 3 were assisting him in the sale of these drugs to IT professionals, businessmen and students. The authorized officers explained to them about the availability of his right under Section 50 of the Act and they did not consent for search being done in the -4- presence of a Gazetted Officer. As such, the authorized officers conducted search and found 1st accused possessing a plastic bottle wrapped in aluminium foil and it was found to be containing LSD, a psychotropic substance. Nothing was seized from the possession of accused Nos.2 & 3.
5. During the search, the NCB officers also found 3 polythene pouches containing off-white colour material. The 1st accused informed them that these pouches contained MDMA, another psychotropic substance and it was seized. They were all seized and it weighed 117 grams. During further search of the house, they found a polythene packet and on inquiry, it was revealed that it contained mixture of MDMA, Mephedrone and Ajinomoto and it weighed 439 grams. One hookah was also found. All the samples were collected and psychotropic substances were weighed by the authorized officer in the presence of witnesses. -5- Voluntary statements of the accused were recorded under Section 67 of the Act. Hence, a case was registered for the above offences.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor representing the respondent has filed detailed objections opposing the bail petition contending that this petitioner was very much found in the house of the 1st accused where psychotropic substances of different varieties were found and seized. It is submitted that prima facie case is forthcoming in regard to the possession of substances and dealing with the same. Hence, he requests the Court to dismiss the bail application.
7. It is true that voluntary statements of all the accused have been recorded by the authorized officers and it has some sanctity. On a comparison of the voluntary statements and chemical analysis reports, there is not much truth in the statements. Nothing is -6- seized from the custody of accused Nos.2 & 3 and the 1st accused was the owner of all these psychotropic substances. Anyhow there are no allegations against the petitioner relating to offences punishable under Sections 19, 24, 27 and 27-A of the Act. The entire investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed.
8. A large number of cases under the NDPS Act are pending before the special Court and it takes a lot of time for the learned to frame charges and to start trial. Petitioner is said to be holding a Masters Decree in Business Management and comes from a respectable family. He is in judicial custody since 04/04/2015. Apart from this, FSL report has been received and it is negative in respect of sample Nos.1, 3, 4 & 5. Only sample No.6 is positive said to be containing amphetamine. The owner of the house from which the substances were seized has not stated anything about the 2nd accused allegedly residing with the 1st accused. -7- Taking all these into consideration, petitioner is entitled to be released on bail, subject, of course, to conditions. Whatever observations made while disposing of this application, the same shall not influence the learned Judge while deciding the case on merits.
9. In the result, the petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and bail is granted to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Special Court.
b) Petitioner shall not hold out threats to the prosecution witnesses or lure them in any manner.
c) Petitioner shall not involve himself in any criminal activities and shall co-operate with the investigating officer in conducting the case.-8-
d) Petitioner shall attend the Court on all the dates of hearing and shall mark his attendance at the Jurisdictional Police Station on every Second working Wednesday between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. without fail for a period of one year from the date of his release;
e) It is made clear that if the petitioner violates any on of the conditions mentioned above, prosecution will be at liberty to seek for cancellation of bail from the concerned Sessions Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE MS*