IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7981 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
Sumon Shaik S., S/o Badrul Shaik, Aged about 30 years, R/at No.22/09/735, Ground Floor, 1st Cross, Bannerghatta Road, Basavanapura, Bangalore – 83. ...Petitioner (By Sri. K.N.Narayanaswamy, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, B.I.A.L. Police Station, Bangalore – 560 300. Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 01. ...Respondent (By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.84/2018 of BIAL Police Station, Bangalore City for the offences P/U/S 21(b) of NDPS Act, Section 14 of Foreigners Act and Section 7(2) of Foreigners Orders.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Crime No.84/2018 of BIAL Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 21(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 14 of Foreigners Act and Section 7(2) of Foreigners Orders.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. Gist of the complaint is that on 17.09.2018 at about 4.00 p.m., the complainant received a credible information that at KIAL Parking Staff canteen a person is standing and alleged to have been in possession of prohibited drugs (tablets). Immediately, he informed the same to his superior officer and secured panchas and staff members and went to the spot and apprehended the petitioner/accused. On personal search, they seized 80 Methamphetamine tablets of 6 grams each. Further seized mobile and cash of Rs.500/-. By drawing the mahazar, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that already charge sheet has been filed and even at the time of filing of the charge sheet, FSL report has not been produced. If no such report is produced as contemplated under Standing Instruction No.1.88 of Narcotics Control Bureau, New Delhi, it cannot be held as a narcotic drug, as such the petitioner/accused is entitled to be released on bail. Further it is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the seizure procedure is also not in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the Investigating Officer has also not investigated the case on the statement given by the petitioner/accused to ascertain whether he is residing within the Bengaluru city or not? Further it is submitted that he is also having the Aadhar card created by the Government. Further it is submitted that he is having a family and even there is no prima- facie material as against the petitioner/accused to show that he is not involved in the serious offence. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the quantity of the contraband tablets received from the possession of the petitioner is more than the commercial quantity. The petitioner is a habitual offender and he is involved in many more criminal cases. If he is released on bail, he may abscond and may not available for trial. Further it is submitted that he has entered Indian territory without there being any valid Passport or VISA. It is further submitted that he was conscious of the psychotropic drugs. The petitioner/accused is absconding and no proper explanation has been given by the petitioner/accused to explain his possession. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the records.
7. As could be seen from the records, the quantity of the Psychotropic drug which has been seized is 80 tablets of 6 grams each, that itself amounts to more than the commercial quantity. Under such circumstance, the provisions of Section 37 of the Act are attracted and according to the said Section, the burden is upon the petitioner/accused to satisfy the Court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Though several grounds have been urged including the fact that the FSL report and other things are not produced and when already charge sheet has been filed, the accused has not explained under what circumstance, he had the seized drugs in his possession.
8. It is the apprehension of the learned HCGP that he is a habitual offender and not having any valid VISA or Passport. If he is released on bail, the petitioner/accused may again involve in criminal activities.
9. Under the said facts and circumstances, I feel that it is not a fit case to release the petitioner/accused on bail. Hence, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE VBS