Petitioner bail application has been rejected under NDPS Act: Karnataka High court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9518 2021 BETWEEN: SANNALA SRI DURGA RAKESH KUMAR S O.SANNALA GANTAYYA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R AT BLOCK 4 TF 6 JNNURM BUILDING NEAR GURUKULAM MARIKAVALASA MADHURAWADA VISHAKHAPATNAM RURAL KOMMADI VISHAKHAPATNAM ANDRA PRADESH 530 048. STATE BY NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAUBENGALURU ZONAL UNIT REP. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560001. … PETITIONER BY SRI VEERESHA E. ADVOCATE) BY SRI M.R. BALAKRISHNA CGC) … RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN N.C.B.F.NO.48 1 22 2021 BZU OF THE N.C.B. POLICE STATION BENGALURU ZONAL UNIT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 8(C) R W SECTIONS 22(a)(b)(c) 27 28 29 OF N.D.P.S. ACT. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS ‘THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE’ THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking N.C.B.F.No.48 1 22 2021 BZU of the Narcotics Control Bureau NCB) Bengaluru Zonal Unit for the offence punishable under Section 8(C) read with Sections 22(a)(b)(c) 27 28 and 29 of NDPS Act. respondent State. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the The factual matrix of the case is that on 22.10.2021 at about 8.10 hours the complainant has received the credible information that a person by name Praneeth aged around 20 years will cross Devanahalli Toll Gate from Bengaluru City to Hyderabad in red coloured swift car bearing No.AP 37 DS 2191 along with other accused persons carrying 21 grms of MDMA pills 40 grams of Methamphetamine 3 grams of Methaqualone and 0.5 grams of ganja. The seized articles are commercial quantity and the punishment is up to 10 to 20 years and the matter is under investigation. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this petitioner is in custody from two months and he is only an occupant of the car and from his conscious possession nothing is recovered. Hence he may be enlarged on bail and there is no need of custodial interrogation. Per contra learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondent State would submit that the ganja seized is only a commercial quantity and the punishment for the same would be up to 10 to 20 years. Apart from that he would also submit that the matter is under investigation and at this juncture the petitioner cannot be enlarged on bail unless the supplier of the MDMA manufactured drug is apprehended. Hence it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner. Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the material available on record it is seen that commercial quantity of 21 grams of MDMA drug is seized and apart from that other types of drugs is also seized and the quantity is commercial quantity. It is also important to note that the drugs which were seized are manufactured drug about 41 grams and not a narcotic substance. Hence it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. during the course of the investigation and the presence of the petitioner is required for further investigation in the matter and charge sheet In view of the discussions made above I pass the is not yet filed. The Criminal Petition is rejected. ii) However liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach this Court after filing of charge Sd JUDGE 

Summary: The criminal petition is filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C ( special powers of high court or court of session regarding bail) for regular bail for the offence punishable under section 8(C)read with sections 22(a)(b)(c), 27,28 and 29of “ Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act” which is also referred to as NDPC by the petitioner. And the petition is rejected by the High court of Karnataka through the learned bench led by Honorable Mr. Justice H P Sandesh in the case of Sannala Sri Durga Rakesh Kumar vs State by Narcotics Control Bureau ( Criminal petition no.9518/2021) on 20th January 2022.  Brief facts of the case are that on 22nd October 2021 at about 8.10 hours, the complainant has received the credible information that a person by name Praneeth, aged around 20 years, will cross Devanahalli Toll Gate from Bengaluru City to Hyderabad in red coloured swift car bearing No.AP-37-DS-2191 along with other accused persons carrying 21 grams of MDMA pills, 40 grams of Methamphetamine, 3 grams of Methaqualone and 0.5 grams of ganja. The seized articles are in commercial quantity and for that he was charged under section 8(C)( prohibits the production, manufacturing, possession, selling, purchase, transport, warehouse, use, consumption, inter-state import and export, import to and from India or tranship of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, except for medical or scientific purposes, and requires a licence or permit by the concerned authorities) read with sections 22(a)( punishment for contravention involves small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both section 22(b)(punishment for contravention involves quantity lesser than commercial quantity but greater than small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years and with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees) section 22(c)( punishment for contravention involves commercial quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to twenty years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees: Provided that the court may, for reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a fine exceeding two lakh rupees),27( punishment for consumption of any Narcotics drug or psychotropic substances),28( punishment for attempts to commit offences) and 29( punishment for abetment or criminal conspiracy) of “ Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act” under which punishment is up to 10 to 20 years and the matter is under investigation.  Arguments presented by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is in custody from two months and he is only an occupant of the car and from his conscious possession, nothing is recovered. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail and there is no need of custodial interrogation.  Arguments presented by learned central government counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- state that the ganja which is seized from the car , is only a commercial quantity and the punishment for the same would be up to 10 to 20 years. Apart from that, he also presented that the matter is under investigation and at this juncture, the petitioner cannot be enlarged on bail, unless the supplier of the MDMA manufactured drug is apprehended. Hence, it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner.  After hearing both the counsels and looking into the records presented before the Honorable court by the counsels that the drugs which were seized from the car are manufactured drugs and are also in a commercial quantity. And for the further investigation, petitioner presence is required as a result the court rejected the bail petition. Click here to read the judgement