ORDER : A. Badharudeen, J. This is a petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking pre-arrest bail and the petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.9/2022 of Excise Enforcement and Anti-Narcotic Special Squad, Malappuram now pending as S.C. No.1615/2022 before the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act and NDPS Act Cases, Manjeri. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary and relevant materials available. 3. Precisely, the prosecution allegation is that at about 10.10 p.m. on 10.06.2022, accused Nos. 1 to 3 possessed 54 gram of Methamphetamine and 2 gram of MDMA pills against the prohibitions contained in the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'NDPS Act' hereinafter). Accordingly, the 1st accused was nabbed along with the contraband and crime alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(C), 29 and 60(3) of the NDPS Act was registered against him. The specific case against the petitioner herein is that, he along with the 1st and 2nd accused also transported the contraband in the car and at the time of detection of the same, he ran away from the place of occurrence on seeing the Special Squad. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and nothing recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He also would submit that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot, though the prosecution has a case that, he also traveled in the car where the contraband was transported along with the other accused. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for grant of anticipatory bail, on the submission that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and he deserves pre-arrest bail. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in a case where the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(C), 29 and 60(3) of the NDPS Act, involving commercial quantity of Methamphetamine and MDMA, on the submission that grant of bail in cases involving commercial quantity of contraband shall be subject to satisfaction of the twin conditions stipulated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Therefore, grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who has direct involvement in this crime, who also transported the contraband by traveling along with the 1st and 2nd accused in the car at the time of detection and ran away on seeing the Special Squad, would be fatal to the prosecution. 6. It is also submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that, as per the statement given by the 1st accused, it has been specifically stated that the 1st accused along with 2nd and 3rd accused/petitioner herein, traveled in a car bearing registration No.KL-02-AV-785 to Bangalore and purchased the contraband and while returning back along with the contraband, they were intercepted by the Special Squad and the 1st accused was nabbed along with the contraband. 7. It is discernible from the statement given by the 1st accused that, accused Nos.1 to 3 not only traveled and purchased the contraband, they transported the contraband and they had constant calls in between them, in this regard and call details in this regard also collected during investigation. In the statement of the 1st accused, it has been specifically mentioned that, all the accused used to get small profit out of the same. Thus, it appears that, the involvement of the petitioner in this crime is well made out, primafacie. 8. Insofar as grant of anticipatory bail, in a cases involving commercial quantity of contraband under the NDPS Act is concerned, the same could not be considered normally, since grant of regular bail itself could not be considered without satisfying the binary conditions stipulated in Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The conditions are; 1) the court has to satisfy that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence and 2) that the accused is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. These conditions are to be read conjunctively. The only exception to be carved out to consider plea of pre-arrest bail must be in cases where the involvement of the person seeking anticipatory bail not at all made out, in any manner, from the prosecution records. In the instant case, involvement of the petitioner herein is well made out, prima facie, from the prosecution records and in such a case, grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner would be fatal to the prosecution and the same cannot be resorted to. In the instant case, involvement of the petitioner herein is well made out, prima facie, from the prosecution records and in such a case, grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner would be fatal to the prosecution and the same cannot be resorted to. Therefore, anticipatory bail plea at the instance of the 3rd accused/petitioner must fail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application stands dismissed. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner expressed the willingness of the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer, the petitioner is directed to surrender, within a period of seven days from today.