Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1472 (KER)

Lijin S/o Shakir v. State of Kerala

2025-05-27

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

body2025
ORDER : 1. This bail application is filed under section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’). 2. Petitioner is the 3 rd accused in Crime No.1766 of 2023 of Attingal Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under sections 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act'). 3. According to the prosecution, on 30.07.2023, petitioner along with other accused were found in possession and transporting 89.70 grams of MDMA in a Toyota Altis car bearing Registration No.DL-4-CNE-3652 for the purpose of sale and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Petitioner was arrested on 30.07.2023 and he has been in custody since. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, in separate bail applications, all the remaining accused were granted bail by the trial court as early as in March, 2025 and except the petitioner, all others are at liberty. The learned counsel further submitted that the trial court has, pursuant to the directions of this Court in the respective bail applications of accused 1, 2, 4 and 5, granted bail, while the bail application of the petitioner has been pending consideration from April, 2025. 7. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and that the quantity involved in the case is commercial quantity and therefore the riguor of Section 37 of NDPS Act will apply and hence, petitioner ought not to be released on bail. It was also submitted that the Sessions Court referred to the decision in Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh , 2024 Live Law (SC) 416 while the decision in Narcotics Control Bureau v. Mohit Aggarwal, (2022) 18 SCC 374 was not noticed. 8. I have considered the rival contentions. 9. Petitioner is the 3 rd accused. Concededly, accused 1, 2, 4 and 5 have already been granted bail by Annexures A10, A11, A12 and A13. The first accused was granted bail on 15.03.2025, the 2 nd accused on 28.03.2025, the 4 th accused on 29.03.2025 while the 5 th accused was granted bail on 04.03.2025. Petitioner is the only person who has not been granted bail. Concededly, accused 1, 2, 4 and 5 have already been granted bail by Annexures A10, A11, A12 and A13. The first accused was granted bail on 15.03.2025, the 2 nd accused on 28.03.2025, the 4 th accused on 29.03.2025 while the 5 th accused was granted bail on 04.03.2025. Petitioner is the only person who has not been granted bail. Petitioner was arrested on 30.07.2023 and has been in custody since then. By separate orders of this Court, which are produced as Annexures A4 and A5, the bail applications of other accused were directed to be considered by the Sessions Court, in the light of the decisions mentioned therein and thereafter the Sessions Court granted bail to accused 1, 2, 4 and 5. 10. Though in Mohit Aggarwal' s case (supra), the Supreme Court had observed that the long detention of the accused is not a matter which has significance when the quantity seized is commercial in nature, I am of the view that considering the bail granted to all the other accused, a parity must be maintained since the persons facing the same allegations have been granted bail. No other instance of any significance have been pointed out to refuse bail to the petitioner. Further, petitioner has been in custody for almost 22 months. In this context, it needs to be mentioned that the learned Public Prosecutor conceded that no application for cancelling the bail granted to accused 1, 2, 4 and 5 have been preferred. 11. Having regard to the above circumstances, I am of the view that petitioner ought to be released on regular bail on strict conditions. It is also to be noted that the investigation has already been completed and the case is now pending as S.C. No.183 of 2024 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-V, Thiruvananthapuram. 12. In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:- (a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. (b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case. (c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence. (d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail. (b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case. (c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence. (d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail. (e) Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court. 13. In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.