Anoop M.O vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 13958 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
  TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1943
                BAIL APPL. NO. 3931 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 645/2021 OF I ADDITIONAL
      DISTRICT COURT, TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
        CRIME NO.447/2021 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:

         ANEESH
         AGED 27 YEARS
         S/O.SUDHAN, THARISHIL VEEDU, MURIYATHOTTAM,
         POUTHIYANVILA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
         (NOW RESIDING AT POOVANVILA VEEDU, KULATHILA,
         PERUMPAZHUTHOOR, NEMON, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.)

         BY ADVS.
         MITHUN P.
         PARVATHY S.KRISHNAN


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

         STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
         HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

         ADV.SRI. SANTHOSH PETER, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.07.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4882/2021, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. Nos.3931 & 4882 OF 2021
                             -2-



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
 TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1943
                 BAIL APPL. NO. 4882 OF 2021
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 696/2021 OF I
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
          CRIME NO.447/2021 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION,
                      THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

           ANOOP M.O.
           AGED 29 YEARS
           S/O. MOHANAN, THANNIVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,
           KALATHUVILA, PERUMPAZHATHOOR P.O.,
           NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

           BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN


RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

    1      STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

    2      THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
           NEMOM POLICE STATION,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695020.


        THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.07.2021, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3931/2021, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. Nos.3931 & 4882 OF 2021
                                 -3-



                             ORDER

These are applications filed under Section 439 of the

Cr.P.C. by the accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively in crime

No.447/2021 of Nemom police station. The crime was

registered on 28.03.2021 alleging offence punishable under

Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, after seizing 23.45 kg

of ganja and also an amount of Rs.34,200/- from car

bearing No.KL-19B-7200.

2. According to the prosecution, both the

petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 and 2, were passengers

of the said car. They were intercepted by the detecting

officer at Pravachambalam, the crime was registered after

seizing the items and arresting the accused, following the

procedural formalities.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner in

B.A.No.3931/2021 contended that Annexure-A2 CD

produced along with the petition will belie the contention of

the prosecution. According to the learned counsel, a GPS BAIL APPL. Nos.3931 & 4882 OF 2021

tracking device was installed in the car. If that CD is played

for a while, the falsity of the prosecution would be made

out. This argument has been strongly supported by the

learned counsel for the petitioner in B.A.No.4882/2021 also,

who is the second accused in the crime.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the

application. According to him, the first accused, petitioner

in B.A.3931/2021 is a history sheeter that he has seven

other crimes to his credit, which include NDPS cases

offences under Sections 308, 380 IPC etc. No such

antecedent is noticed against the petitioner in

B.A.No.4882/2021.

5. Whatever it may be, it is true that the petitioners

are in custody from 28.03.2021 onwards. Eventhough both

the counsel have strongly urged for looking into the CD

produced along with B.A.No.3931/21, this Court is not

inclined, especially when dealing with the jurisdiction under

Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., to go into such aspects of the

matter. On the face of the documents and materials, offence BAIL APPL. Nos.3931 & 4882 OF 2021

under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) is revealed against the

petitioners for having possessed commercial quantity of

ganja. The embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act also

is attracted. The materials so far made available do not

impel this court to assume, at least at this stage, that no

reasonable grounds are made out to think that the

petitioners are innocent. Moreover, as noticed earlier, the

first accused has criminal antecedents also.

For these reasons, the applications are dismissed.

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL JUDGE nkr/06.07.2021