Muhammad Dilshad C.P vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 1008 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
   TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 5TH MAGHA, 1943
                      BAIL APPL. NO. 9742 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 107/2021 OF SPECIAL COURT
                      (NDPS ACT CASES), VADAKARA
PETITIONER/S:

             MUHAMMAD DILSHAD C.P
             AGED 24 YEARS
             S/O. ABDUL MAJEED, CHEROTHPOYIL, UMMINIKUNNU,
             UNNIKULAM P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT PIN 673 574

             BY ADVS.
             P.MOHAMED SABAH
             SAIPOOJA



RESPONDENT/S:

    1        STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
             KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 682 031

    2        STATION HOUSE OFFICER
             THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
             PIN 673 573

             SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP)




     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.01.2022,     THE    COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 9742 of 2021
                                    2



                                ORDER

This is an application for regular bail.

2. The petitioner is the fourth accused in Crime No.784 of

2020 of Thamarassery Police Station, Kozhikode District, alleging

commission of offences under Sections 22(b), 22(c) and 29 of the

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that, the

petitioner together with the other accused Nos.1 to 3 in the case

were found travelling in a car bearing Registration No.KL-11-BN-

6983 at about 11.25 p.m on 28.08.2020. The search of the car and

the person of accused Nos.1 to 3 resulted in recovery of 240 mg of

LSD and 790 mg of MDMA.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently

submits that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the

petitioner is not guilty of the offence. The circumstances which,

according to the learned counsel, indicate that the petitioner is not BAIL APPL. NO. 9742 of 2021

guilty of the offences are;

i. No contraband was found in the possession of the petitioner;

ii. The petitioner is not the owner of the car in question;

iii. There is nothing to indicate that the petitioner was aware

that the other accused in the case were carrying contraband.

The learned counsel therefore submits that notwithstanding

the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner is

entitled to be released on bail. It is also submitted that the

petitioner has been in custody from 29.08.2020 and his further

detention is not necessary for the purpose of any investigation as

the Final Report has already been filed in the matter.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has taken me through the

records. It is submitted that the fact that no contraband was

recovered from the body of the petitioner is no reason to believe

even prima facie that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences

alleged against him. It is submitted that the petitioner was BAIL APPL. NO. 9742 of 2021

travelling in a car along with the accused Nos.1 to 3 and certain

quantity of contraband was recovered from the bodies of accused

Nos.1 to 3 and also from the car. It is submitted that the

investigation has revealed that the petitioner was travelling along

with the accused with full knowledge that contraband was being

transported by the other accused and also in the car. It is

submitted that the drugs are in commercial quantity and the

petitioner is not entitled to bail.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Public Prosecutor, I see no material to come to the

conclusion that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the

petitioner is not guilty of the offence alleged against him.

Therefore on an application of the provisions of Section 37 of the

NDPS Act, the petitioner is not entitled to bail. The learned counsel

for the petitioner point out from Annexure A6 that, even after filing

of the final report, the learned Special Judge was not inclined to

grant bail to the petitioner. I see from Annexure A6 that the

learned Judge has correctly applied the law and has denied bail on BAIL APPL. NO. 9742 of 2021

account of provisions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Bail Application fails and it is dismissed.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

spk