IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6664 of 2008() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02/04/2008 IN IN CR /1/2008 IN CMP.267/2008 of SPL. COURT (NDPS ACT CASES), VADAKARA O.R.NO.1/2008 OF KIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE,CALICUT PETITIONER(S): 3RD ACCUSED:- -------------------- GURUDARSHAN SINGH RATTAN S/O.BACHAN SINGH,JAIN TOWER, C-2, 2ND FLOOR, BALAMANDIR ROAD, RAJASTHAN. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ADV. SRI.C.P.UDAYA BHANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6664 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 31st day of October,2008 O R D E R Petition for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 21 and 23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. According to prosecution, 1st accused was taken into custody from the house of his friend and he was found in possession of 5 kg of heroin. On questioning him, it was revealed that he had kept 6 kg of heroin in his uncle's house also. The said heroin was also seized. It is further revealed in investigation that first accused hatched a criminal conspiracy with fourth accused in Rajasthan and procured the contraband articles through accused 2 and 3 who brought it into Kerala. Petitioner is the 3rd accused. Fifth accused is the person who allegedly financed the accused for procuring the articles. First accused had actually brought 10 kg of heroin from Rajasthan, out of which 6 kg is kept in his uncle's house and 4 kg is allegedly sold to 7th accused. But during the investigation nothing could be seized from 7th accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is in custody from 25-3-2008 onwards for the past about seven months. Petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. He only transported a bag, which was handed over to him BA 6664 /08 -2- from Rajasthan to Calicut. He was not aware of the contents. Even according to prosecution, 1st accused is the king pin and petitioner's role is limited. Therefore, bail may be granted to petitioner, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Special Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner is the 3rd accused who procured the article along with 2nd accused from Rajasthan and handed over the same to 1st accused. Petitioner was arrested along with accused 1 and 2 from the same room of a hotel. This is the third application for bail. The earlier applications were dismissed considering the gravity of the offence. The article involved is huge. 5. B.A. no.5960/2008 filed by 1st accused was also considered by this Court and it was dismissed as per order dated 7-10-2008. There was a direction, while disposing of the said case, to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, considering the long period of detention. Therefore, the trial court posted the case for framing of charge. If petitioner is released on bail, it is likely that he will abscond and trial will be protracted. Accused 4 and 6 are not arrested. They have a major role in this case. Petitioner will influence witnesses and tamper with BA 6664 /08 -3- evidence. Though fifth accused was granted bail by another bench of this Court, his role is only limited. 6. On hearing both sides and on considering the gravity of offence and possibility of witnesses being influenced or intimidated and evidence being tampered with and also on taking into consideration the stage of the case, I find that it may not be proper in the interest of justice to grant bail to petitioner at this stage. Learned Special Judge is directed to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible without any delay, considering the long period of detention of petitioner in custody. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.