Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2155 (KAR)

PANGI NARESH S/O LEKU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

2019-11-11

ASHOK G NIJAGANNAVAR

body2019
ORDER : 1. This petition is filed by petitioners/accused Nos. 1 and 3 under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in Crime No.75/2018 of Hubballi Bendigeri Police Station Crime No.20(B)(II)(C) of NDPS Act, 1985. 2. The facts briefly stated in the petition are that, on 11.09.2018, the police officials received a credible information that three persons are carrying Ganja at Maganese Plot near FCI Godown Gate on Mantur Road, Hubballi. On the basis of the said information, a case was registered and thereafter the officials have gone to the spot along with panchas. Three persons were caught red handed and the contraband property Ganja was seized from their possession. Each accused was found in possession of 6 kg 600 gms Ganja, which was seized by drawing mahazer in the presence of panchas. The accused were taken to custody on 11.09.2018 along with the seized property. Since then they are in judicial custody. 3. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the respondent State. Perused the materials on record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos. 1 and 3 would strenuously contend that the quantity of contraband property Ganja seized from the possession of the accused is not a commercial quantity. The police officials have seized the property at the spot, but there are some procedural lapses, which were required to be followed as prescribed under the NDPS Act. The sample taken out from the seized material has been sent to FSL for examination, but no report is forthcoming. The accused No.2 was granted bail. Accused Nos.1 and 3 being on the same footing are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. These petitioners are ready and willing to abide by the conditions to be imposed by the Hon’ble Court. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP conceded that the contraband Ganja seized is not a commercial property. These petitioners along with accused No.2 were caught red handed at the spot and Ganja has been seized from their possession. Even though the charge sheet has been filed, after completion of investigation, release of these accused will affect the interest of the Society and in the event of granting bail, the petitioners/accused are likely to commit similar offences and abscond. 6. Even though the charge sheet has been filed, after completion of investigation, release of these accused will affect the interest of the Society and in the event of granting bail, the petitioners/accused are likely to commit similar offences and abscond. 6. On perusal of the prosecution records, it is evident that the police officials on receiving credible information have conducted raid and seized Ganja from three persons namely accused Nos. 1 to 3. It is an admitted fact that each accused was found in possession of 6 kg 600 grams of ganja which is less than commercial quantity. Thus, the restrictions placed as per Clause (B) of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not strictly applicable as the quantity of ganja seized from each of the accused is not commercial quantity. In addition to that, despite filing of the charge sheet, the FSL report has not been secured to confirm that the contraband seized is Ganja. At this stage, there is no need to make elaborate discussion or specific finding about the non-compliance of the procedure required to be followed under the NDPS Act. Since the FSL report is not forthcoming, no definite conclusion can be drawn as contended by the counsel for the petitioner. 7. It is submitted that the accused Nos. 1 and 3 are in judicial custody since 11.09.2018. As already submitted by the learned HCGP, the contraband property has been seized and no grounds are made out to show that their further detention is necessary for interrogation. The main objection of the prosecution is that, in the event of granting bail, the accused/petitioners are likely to commit similar offences. In the instant case, there are no allegations that the accused are habitual offenders and no material has been placed to show that they have any criminal antecedents. Accused No.2 has been granted bail in the similar facts and circumstances of the case. As far as objection of the learned HCGP is concerned, the same may be set right by imposing stringent conditions. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for granting bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners shall be released on bail in connection with Spl. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that there are valid grounds for granting bail subject to certain terms and conditions. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners shall be released on bail in connection with Spl. N.D.P.S. C.C. No.06/2018 arising out of Hubballi Bendegeri Crime No.75/2018 pending on the file of the Hon’ble Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, subject to following conditions: i. The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. ii. The petitioners shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses. iii. The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court/Session court on all the future hearing dates unless prevented by any genuine cause. iv. The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court/Sessions Court without prior permission, till the disposal of the case. v. In the event of registration of any other criminal case in respect of commission of similar offence, the present bail order shall stand cancelled. vi. The petitioners shall mark their attendance in respondent – Hubballi Bendigeri Police Station in the first week of every month till the trial is concluded. Violation of any of the above conditions would result in cancellation of the bail automatically.