Kerala High Court
Riyas vs State Of Kerala on 23 May, 2024
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1845 OF 2024
CRIME NO.754/2023 OF PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.1398 OF 2023 OF DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM
PETITIONER/2ND ACCSUED:
RIYAS
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O. SAIFUDEEN, SIYAD MANZIL, PERUMKULAM, MANAMBOOR
VILLAGE, VARKALA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-,
PIN - 695141
BY ADV P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. NEEMA T.V.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A. NO.1845 OF 2024 2
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2024
ORDER
The application is filed under Section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the second accused
in Crime No.754/2023 of the Parippally Police Station,
Kollam, registered against the accused (two in number)
for allegedly committing the offences punishable under
Sections 22(c), 20(b)(ii) (B), 29 and 31 of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short,
'the Act').
2. The crux of the prosecution case, is that: on
5.6.2023, at around 17.50 hours, while the first accused
was travelling in a car through the National Highway
from Thiruvananthapuram to Kollam, he was intercepted
by the Detecting Officer. On conducting a search in the
vehicle, 4.200 kg of ganja and 14 grams of MDMA were
recovered from him. Thus, the accused has committed
the above offences.
3. Heard; Sri. P.Anoop, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V., the
learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations
levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in
the crime. The petitioner has reliably learnt that as per
the chemical analysis report, the contraband involved in
the case is 'Methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA' as
alleged by the prosecution. Therefore, the contraband is
of an intermediate quantity. Moreover, the petitioner
has been in judicial custody since 14.8.2023, the
investigation in the case is complete and recovery has
been effected. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be
released on bail. Hence, the application may be allowed.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the
application. She submitted that the petitioner is involved
in a subsequent crime of a similar nature. If the petitioner
is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of him
committing similar offences. The investigation in the
case is complete. However, she conceded to the fact that
as per the chemical analysis report submitted by the
State Forensic Science Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram
dated 30.12.2023, the contraband involved in the case is
'Methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA' as stated in the FIR.
6. The prosecution was lodged against the
petitioner on the allegation that he was found in
conscious possession of 14 grams of MDMA and 4.200 Kg
of ganja. He was arrested on the spot with the
contraband. Since the contraband i.e., 14 grams of
MDMA falls within the specification of commercial
quantity, the rigour under Section 37 of the Act was
applied and the petitioner was denied bail by the Court of
Session as per Annexure A1 order. Now, as per the
chemical analysis report, it has turned out that the
contraband involved in the case is 'Methamphetamine'
and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is of an
intermediate quantity. Indisputably, the petitioner was
not involved in any case prior to the registration of the
present crime. Even otherwise, the rigour under Section
37 of the Act will not apply to the present the case.
7. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the
facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the
materials placed on record, especially considering the
fact that the contraband involved in the case is of
intermediate quantity as per the chemical analysis report
dated 30.12.2023, the investigation in the case is
complete and recovery has been effected, I am of the
definite view that the petitioner's further detention is
unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail
application.
In the result, the application is allowed, by directing
the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a
bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two
solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction
of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to
the following conditions: :
(i) The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m.
and 11 a.m for a period of three months or till the final
report is filed, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear
before the Investigating Officer as and when required;
(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or procure to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any
Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner,
whatsoever;
(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence
while they are on bail;
(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if
any, before the court below at the time of execution of the
bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the
effect before the court below on the date of execution of
the bond;
(v) In case of violation of any of the conditions
mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be
empowered to consider the application for cancellation of
bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in
accordance with law.
(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail
conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court
below.
(vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the
powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the
matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the
information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the
petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)
and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].
SD/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm23/5/2024
