Bombay high court denied bail to the two accused who were apprehended by the police with 9 others (2 abscondings) with 203 kg marijuana in their cars which they were smuggling from Andhra Pradesh into Maharashtra.
Facts
Acting on secret information received by the police that some persons were bringing contraband (Ganja) from Andhra Pradesh to Maharashtra in Swift Dezire car, the police intercepted three cars from which they caught 203 kg and 450 grams of marijuana. All three cars had 3 passengers each including the two applicants. The case was filed under the sections of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985 before the learned special court at Nasik. The special judge refused the bail to the applicants on the ground that the quantity of the contraband recovered was a commercial quantity due to which appeal for bail was filed in the Bombay high court.
Applicant’s contention
The counsel for applicant Sunil Jagtap argued that his client was a mere passenger who took a lift in the car which had drugs and had no knowledge of the presence of such contraband and thus having no conscious possession of the drugs. The counsel further submitted that there was a lapse in the investigation and his client had no prior criminal record and pleaded his release on bail on these grounds. The counsel for the second applicant Sharad karke adopted similar grounds and pleaded that his client was also a mere passenger without any knowledge of contraband in the car and was not needed to be held in detention till the trial was pending.
Prosecution’s reply
The learned APP opposing the applicant submitted that since a commercial quantity of contraband was confiscated from the cars, fact that no contraband was recovered upon the personal search of the applicant was immaterial. The prosecution further submitted that applicant Sunil Jagtap was found driving the car at the time of raid and applicant Sharad karke was present in the car at that time. The prosecution relying on multiple Supreme Court judgments submitted against the release of the applicants on bail.
Court’s finding
The single-judge bench of Justice C.V. Badhang, upon considering arguments of both sides reached to the conclusion that sufficient grounds for bail were not made out. The court referring to the question of law held that since the commercial quantity of marijuana was recovered, the fact that no contraband was recovered on personal search was not enough ground as rest of the quantity was recovered from the same car in which the applicants were traveling. On the applicant’s contention that they were mere passengers and had no knowledge of the contraband, the court remarked “The defence about the Applicants being mere passengers also cannot be accepted at this stage. Although, the Applicant Sunil Jagtap claims that he had requested for a lift, as he wanted to come from Nagar to Nashik, the statement of Dyaneshwar Narwade would show to the contrary. The Applicant Sharad Karke has not even claimed that he had obtained a lift. The Supreme Court in the case of Kulwindar Singh (supra) was concerned with a similar situation in which the defense about the accused being a mere passenger in the vehicle from where the contraband was recovered was not accepted. It is necessary to note that this is not the stage where the evidence can be examined or appreciated in details, else otherwise, it may prejudice either the prosecution or the defence at the trial.”
The court finally refused the bail stating “As noticed earlier, the case involves recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband, where the presumption under Section 54 of the Act will be attracted. Thus, no case for grant of bail is made out.”
Read Order @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
