IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.6516/2018 BETWEEN:
Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau Bangalore Zonal Unit, No.7/1-2, Priyank Villas, Ramanna Garden, Baglur Main Road, Kattigenahalli, Yelahanka, Bangaloe-560 063 (By Sri.K.N.Mohan, Spl.P.P) AND:
1. S.Syed Abdul Kadher, S/o Shaul Hameed Aged about 37 years R/at No.14/28, Muttali Karan Theru, Mannady Chennai-600 001 Tamil Nadu 2. Abu Thahir, S/o Syed Aliyar, Aged about 38 years, R/at No.6/21, Adam Street, Mannady, …Petitioner Chennai-600 001 Tamil Nadu 3. B.Sardar, S/o Basha Bai, Aged about 52 years R/at No.6, Bearer Street, Mannady, Chennai-600 001 Tamil Nadu.
(By Sri. K.S.Vishwanath, Advocate) …Respondents This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. praying to cancel the bail granted to the respondents vide order dated 26.04.2018 in N.C.B.F.No. 48/1/15/2017/BZU in Crl.Misc.No.3184/2018 passed by the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NDPS), Bengaluru for the offence p/u/s 22, 28, 29 r/w 20(B) and 28 of NDPS, Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the petitioner-Narcotics Control Bureau and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner has filed this petition for cancellation of the bail granted by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Sections 22, 28, 29 read with Section 20(B) and 28 of NDPS, Act.
3. The trial court after perusal of the entire materials on record, has came to the conclusion that though the factual matrix of the case discloses that recovery of some narcotic substance weighting 25 kgs of Ephedrine and Phenmetrazine but the court has observed that the petitioner has not produced the quantitative analysis of the same and the Court has also observed that respondent No.1 was suffering from Appendicitis and respondent No.3 suffering from high Blood Pressure and both are taking treatment in the jail. Considering the above said facts, the Court has opined that in the absence of specific quantitative analysis of the narcotic substance, has come to the definite conclusion that the quantity recovered from the respondents does not exceed the commercial quantity. Therefore, the trial Court has granted bail by imposing certain conditions. Respondents have not violated any of the conditions imposed by the trial Court. Further added to the above facts, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that respondents have not given their local address and they may abscond from the clutches of law. The said argument is baseless because there are no allegations that respondents have violated any of the conditions imposed by the trial Court i.e. they should appear before the Investigating Officer and assist the Investigating Officer and also shall not tamper the prosecution witness or abscond.
In view of the above said circumstances, as the respondents are regularly appearing before the trial Court and trial also has been commenced, I do not find any strong reason to interfere with the discretionary order passed by the trial Court. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE SB