Karnataka High Court
Sri Sunil vs State By Ashok Nagar P.S on 7 January, 2022
Author: H.P. Sandesh
Bench: H.P. Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8916/2021
BETWEEN:
SRI SUNIL,
S/O DAKSHINA MURTHY,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT NO.158, RUDRAPPA GARDEN,
VIVEK NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 008. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI RAJENDRA K.R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BY ASHOK NAGAR P.S.,
BENGALURU,
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU-01. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K.K. KRISHNA KUMAR, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF
CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.181/2021 REGISTERED BY ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
8(C), 22(c) OF N.D.P.S. ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXXIII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL
JUDGE (NDPS), BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail of the petitioner in Crime No.181/2021 of Ashoknagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('NDPS Act' for short).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner was selling LSD strips, MDMA ecstasy tablets and ganja in public place and he was arrested along with the same i.e., 1 kg 200 grams of ganja, 6 MDMA ecstasy tablets and 0.21 grams of LSD and hence offence under Sections 8(c) and 22(c) of the NDPS Act is invoked.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and the quantity recovered at the instance of the petitioner is 1 kg. 200 grams of ganja and LSD seized is also intermittent quantity 3 and not complied with the guidelines prescribed under Section 50 of the NDPS Act and this petitioner is in custody from last four months and hence he may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State would submit that the quantity seized i.e., ganja is more than small quantity and the same is intermittent quantity and LSD seized is 0.21 grams and 0.1 gram is commercial quantity and the offence is against the Society at large and there would be impact on the Society if the petitioner is enlarged on bail. The learned counsel would submit that there are nine cases against the petitioner and he is a habitual offender.
6. In reply to the arguments of the learned High Court Government Pleader, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in nine cases invoking other IPC offences and in respect of NDPS offence, there are no other cases.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the State and also looking into the factual aspects of the case 4 and the material on record and taking note of the quantity, particularly the LSD seized which is 0.21 grams, the same is commercial quantity and the matter is still under investigation and the charge-sheet is not yet filed. Hence, considering the gravity of the offence, there is a force in the contention of the learned High Court Government Pleader that it will have impact on the Society at large, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail at this juncture. Hence, I do not find any ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail during the course of investigation.
8. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER The petition is rejected. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the Court after filing of the charge-sheet.
Sd/-
JUDGE MD