IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2008 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1006 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRMP.278/2008 of I ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, TRIVANDRUM CRIME NO.25/2008 OF PETTAH POLICE STATION .................... ACCUSED NO.1: ------------------------------ GRACY @ SINDHU, D/O.ELSA, T.C.59/1669, ATTUVARAMBIL VEEDU, CHAKKAI, KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 1006 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for regular bail. The petitioner, a woman, faces allegations under the N.D.P.S. Act. She was allegedly found to keep in her possession 1.030 kgs. of ganja as also 325 mgm. of heroin when the detection was made on 19.1.2008. She was arrested and she continues in custody from that date. The petitioner has criminal antecedents. She is involved in three other similar crimes under the N.D.P.S. Act. Her husband is involved in several crimes, points out the learned Prosecutor. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. The allegation that 1.03 kgs. of ganja were recovered is made maliciously to make it appear that the quantity seized is not at any rate the small quantity. By making such allegation successfully, the possibility of the petitioner getting bail is thwarted by the police. In any view of the matter, the B.A.No. 1006 of 2008 2 petitioner, a woman, who has been remaining in custody from 19.1.2008, may now be enlarged on bail, prays the counsel. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. Considering the quantity of the contraband article and the antecedents of the petitioner, State is obliged to oppose the application, submits the Prosecutor. The bar under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act will not, of course, apply to the facts of this case, he concedes. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am not persuaded to agree that the discretion under Section 439 Cr.P.C. can or ought to be invoked in favour of the petitioner at this stage. The Investigators, in a serious crime like this, must be given sufficient time to complete the investigation, I am satisfied. 5. This application is, in these circumstance, dismissed. But I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this court or the courts below for bail again at a later stage of the investigation, not at any rate, prior to 7.3.2008. The Investigators B.A.No. 1006 of 2008 3 shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to arrest the co-accused and complete the investigation. (R. BASANT) Judge tm