Ummer Farook vs State Of Kerala
2026 Latest Caselaw 2399 Ker

Kerala High Court

Ummer Farook vs State Of Kerala on 30 March, 2026

Author: Kauser Edappagath

Bench: Kauser Edappagath

B.A.No. 1749 of 2026

                                ..1..

                                                  2026:KER:28250


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

   MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1948

                    BAIL APPL. NO. 1749 OF 2026

CRIME NO.26/2024 OF MANANTHAVADY EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, WAYANAD

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 08.10.2025 IN BAIL APPL. NO.12083 OF
                2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

           UMMER FAROOK
           AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. ABDULLA,
           KUMBAKKODE HOUSE, KOCHAR POST,
           ALATTY VILLAGE, SULIYA TALUK,
           DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
           KARNATAKA STATE - ., PIN - 574239

           BY ADVS.
           SRI.VISHNUPRASAD NAIR
           SHRI.ASHIK C.M.
RESPONDENT/STATE:

           STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
           ER, PIN - 682031

           SMT.SREEJA V., SR. PP

     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.03.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 B.A.No. 1749 of 2026

                                  ..2..

                                                         2026:KER:28250



                            ORDER

This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS), seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.1 in Crime No.26/2024 of

Mananthavady Excise Range Office, Wayanad District. The offences

alleged are punishable under Sections 22(c), 25, 27A and 29 of the

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 23.04.2024 at

about 9:30 a.m., accused Nos. 1 and 2 were found in possession of

100.222 grams of Methamphetamine concealed in the dash board of

the Maruthi Suzuki Swift Desire Car bearing No. KL-10-AQ-110 owned

by the accused No.3 at Tholpetty Excise Post, Tholpetty in Thirunelly

Village of Manathavady Taluk, Wayanad District. Subsequently,

investigation revealed that the accused No.3 had abetted and

financially aided the accused Nos. 1 and 2 to purchase the contraband

article and thereby committed the offences.

4. I have heard Sri.Vishnuprasad Nair, the learned counsel for

the applicant and Smt.V.Sreeja, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

..3..

2026:KER:28250

Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted 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

23.04.2024. 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. The learned counsel for the applicant sought bail on two

..4..

2026:KER:28250

grounds: (i) the grounds for arrest were not intimated to the applicant

or his relatives in accordance with law and (ii) the applicant has been

in custody since 23.04.2024 and there is no possibility of concluding

the trial in the near future. The applicant had earlier approached this

Court by filing B.A.No.12083 of 2025, stating that grounds for arrest

were not communicated to him as contemplated by law. The said bail

application was dismissed as per Annexure-6 order, holding that the

grounds for arrest were communicated as contemplated by law. The

learned counsel for the applicant submitted that while disposing of the

bail application as per Annexure-6 order, this Court did not consider the

question as to whether the grounds for arrest were communicated to

the applicant's relatives. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor made

available to me a copy of the intimation under Section 48 of the NDPS

Act. It would show that the grounds for arrest were communicated to

the father of the applicant over the phone. Since the arrest is before

the judgment in Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and

Another (2025 SCC OnLine SC 2356), the communication over the

phone is sufficient. This Court has already held in Abid v. State of

..5..

2026:KER:28250

Kerala (2026 KLT OnLine 1211) that in NDPS cases, bail cannot be

granted on the ground of long incarceration.

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 cannot be

released on bail at this stage. The bail application, accordingly, is

dismissed.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE APA

..6..

2026:KER:28250

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. NO. 1749 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE OCCURRENCE REPORT DATED 23/4/2024 IN CRIME NO. 26/2024 OF ERO, MANANTHAVADY ANNEXURE 1(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 23/4/2024 ANNEXURE 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ARREST MEMO DATED 23/4/2024 PREPARED AT 10:20 AM ANNEXURE 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ARREST INTIMATION NOTICE DATED 23/4/2024 ANNEXURE 3(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT DATED 23/4/2024 ANNEXURE 3(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE COMPLAINT ALONG WITH RELEVANT RECORDS IN CRIME NO. 26/2024 OF ERO, MANANTHAVADY ANNEXURE 4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/6/2024 PASSED BY THE SESSIONS COURT, KALPETTA IN

ANNEXURE 5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5/8/2024 PASSED BY THE SESSIONS COURT, KALPETTA IN

ANNEXURE 6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 8/10/2025 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN B.A. NO.