Petitioner is accused in Crime No.490 of 2014 of the Museum Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 for alleged possession of 1.280 kgs. of ganja on 20.03.2014, is in custody since then and seeks bail.
2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that the contraband was seized from the possession of the petitioner on the relevant day. It is also submitted that the petitioner is involved in 5 other cases of similar nature. According to learned Public Prosecutor, petitioner is a habitual drug dealer engaged in sale of the drug to the school children and youngsters. Learned Public Prosecutor also refers to the report of the investigating officer that the petitioner is one of the prominent figures of Drug Mafia in the city.
3. Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner, while travelling in an Autorickshaw was taken to the custody by the Circle Inspector, Cantonment on 18.03.2014 and learning that no offence is committed, the driver of the Autorickshaw and that vehicle were released, but the petitioner was handed over to the Museum Police who registered case against the petitioner on 20.03.2014. According to the learned counsel, he is falsely implicated as he had preferred a complaint against the Circle Inspector, Cantonment. It is also submitted that wife of the petitioner is undergoing treatment for Cancer and presence of the petitioner is required for her treatment.
4. In the light of the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel I directed the learned Public Prosecutor get information from the investigating officer. The investigating officer has asserted that the allegations made by the petitioner are not true and that the petitioner was arrested with the contraband on 20.03.2014. It is also stated that it is true that the legally wedded wife of the petitioner is undergoing treatment for Cancer but, she is being looked after by her relatives as the petitioner is staying with another lady elsewhere.
5. Having regard to the relevant circumstances, I am inclined to think that request for bail cannot be allowed at this stage notwithstanding that the final report is already filed. It is open to the petitioner to request for bail at a later stage.
Learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram is directed to expedite trial and disposal of the case.
Registry shall sent a copy of this order to the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram.
Application is disposed of with the above direction.
Sd/-
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.
AS /True Copy/ P.A. to Judge