[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Thufail C.P vs State Of Kerala on 26 March, 2026
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
2026:KER:27536
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1948
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
CRIME NO.82/2026 OF Sulthanbathery Excise Range Office,
Wayanad
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.11.2025 IN Bail Appl.
NO.13236 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/S:
THUFAIL C.P,
AGED 32 YEARS
CHEMBOPATTA, PUTHUR, OMASSERY, KODUVALLY TALUK,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673582
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.MOHAMED SABAH
SRI.LIBIN STANLEY
SMT.SAIPOOJA
SRI.SADIK ISMAYIL
SMT.R.GAYATHRI
SRI.M.MAHIN HAMZA
SHRI.ALWIN JOSEPH
SHRI.BENSON AMBROSE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682031
2 THE EXCISE INPECTOR,
EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY, SULTHAN
2026:KER:27536
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
2
BATHERY P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673592
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.M.C. ASHI, SR. PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.03.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:27536
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
3
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail.
2. The applicant is the accused No.2 in Crime
No.82/2025 of Sulthanbathery Excise Range Office, Wayanad
District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 22(c),
27A & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985 (for short, NDPS Act).
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on
08.07.2025, at about 11:15 a.m., the accused No.1 was found in
possession of 131.925 grams of methamphetamine and 480 grams
of ganja and thereby committed the above said offences.The
specific allegation against the applicant is that he hatched a
conspiracy with other accused persons for procuring the said
contraband by way of giving financial aid and also maintaining
regular contact over phone
4. I have heard Sri. P. Mohamed Sabah. the learned
counsel for the applicant and Sri. M.C Ashi. the learned Senior
Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted
2026:KER:27536
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the
present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are
on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he
is entitled to bail. On the other hand, the learned Senior Public
Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of
the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled
to bail at this stage.
6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on
16.09.2025. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the
accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie
shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. Since the quantity
involved is commercial, the jurisdiction of this Court to grant bail is
circumscribed by the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Bail
can be granted in a case where there are reasonable grounds for
believing that the accused is not guilty of such an offence and that
he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
7. It is true that no contraband was seized from the
possession of the applicant. It was seized from the possession of the
accused No.1. The specific case of the prosecution is that the
applicant financed the remaining accused to procure the
contraband. To prove the same, the investigating agency collected
2026:KER:27536
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
several financial transactions between the applicant and the accused
Nos.1, 3 and 4. It is also revealed that the wife of the applicant had
financial transactions with accused Nos.1, 3 and 4. The applicant
has offered some explanation for the financial transactions between
him and the remaining accused in the bail application. But that
explanation is not at all convincing. There were a large number of
telephone calls between the applicant and the remaining accused. It
is also revealed from the investigation that the accused No.1 went
to Bangalore to procure the contraband and the bus ticket for the
accused No.1 to travel to Bangalore was purchased by the applicant
by paying money through his bank account.
8. Having considered the submissions and after having
gone through the materials on record, I am afraid that there are no
substantial or probable causes for believing that the applicant is not
guilty of the offences charged. The applicant has not been able to
point out the existence of any such facts or circumstances as are
sufficient to justify recording a finding that he is not guilty of the
offences charged.
Considering the nature of the crime, the gravity of the
offence, the complicity of the applicant in it, and the facts and
circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant
2026:KER:27536
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
cannot be released on bail at this stage. The bail application,
accordingly, is dismissed.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
SJ
2026:KER:27536
BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 922 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.
82/2026 OF EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, SULTHAN
BATHERY
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE
PETITIONER
Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE
ACCUSED NO.3 IN CRIME NO. 82/2026 OF
EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY
Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE
ACCUSED NO.4 IN CRIME NO. 82/2026 OF
EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT REPORT AGAINST
THE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.2 IN CRIME NO.
82/2026 PREPARED BY THE EXCISE RANGE
OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY
