Court granted bail to the petitioner after 46 days of custody who was held in the possession of MDMA : High Court of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P FRIDAY THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 27TH PHALGUNA 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 1618 OF 2022 CRIME NO.120 2022 OF THONDERANADU POLICE STATION WAYANAD SHIHABUDHEEN AGED 30 YEARS SH HOUSE PAYYANNUR KANKOL PAYYANNUR KANNUR DISTRICT PIN 670307 ABRAHAM GEORGE JACOB STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM PIN 682031 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THONDERNADU THONDERNADU POLICE STATION WAYANAD PIN BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. T.R. RENJITHof the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that while the petitioner was travelling along with the 1st accused on the basis of some suspicion the Sub Inspector of Police Thondernadu Police Station stopped the car and searched the 1st accused and found 0.62 grams of MDMA from him. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that going by the materials on record there is no recovery of contraband from the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter and that the only allegation against the petitioner is that a Rs.10 note which contains traces of MDMA was recovered from the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for 46 days as on today and that his continued detention is not necessary for the purpose of any BA No.1618 2022 5. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes grant of bail The circumstances appearing in the case are pointed out from records. It is submitted that the MDMA along with a glass pipe and the Rs.10 note mentioned above were recovered from the possession of the accused. It is further submitted that there are sufficient materials to show that the petitioner and the 1 st accused were involved in the use of MDMA 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for 46 days I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. I also take note of the fact that no criminal antecedents are reported against the petitioner. The continued detention of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary for the purpose of any investigation In the result the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following a) The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50 000 Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional BA No.1618 2022 b)Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 120 of 2022 of Thondernadu Police Station Wayanad District whenever called upon to do so c) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence any witness in Crime No. 1222 of Thondernadu Police Station Wayanad District d)The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated the investigating officer in Crime No. 1222 of Thondernadu Police Station Wayanad District may file an application before the jurisdictional court for cancellation of bail

Summary: Petitioner was granted bail after 46 days of custody as the continued detention is not necessary for the purpose of investigation and no criminal antecedents are reported against the petitioner subjected to certain conditions upheld by High Court of Kerala through the learned bench led by HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. in the case of SHIHABUDHEEN vs. STATE OF KERALA (BAIL APPL. NO. 1618 OF 2022) on 18th March, 2022. Facts of the case are that The petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 120 of  which was registered alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. And the allegations against the petitioner is that while the petitioner was travelling along with the 1st accused, on the basis of some suspicion, the Sub Inspector of Police, Thondernadu Police Station, stopped the car and searched the 1st accused and found 0.62 grams of MDMA from him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that going by the materials on record, there is no recovery of contraband from the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter and that the only allegation against the petitioner is that a Rs.10/- note, which contains traces of MDMA, was recovered from the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for 46 days as on today and that his continued detention is not necessary for the purpose of any investigation. Public prosecutor vehemently opposes grant of bail. The circumstances appearing in the case are pointed out from records. It is submitted that the MDMA along with a glass pipe and the Rs.10/- note mentioned above were recovered from the possession of the accused. It is further submitted that there are sufficient materials to show that the petitioner and the 1 st accused were involved in the use of MDMA. Regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the court grant bail to the petitioner as no criminal antecedents are reported against the petitioner. And  continued detention of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary for the purpose of any investigation on certain conditions – The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer whenever called upon to do so and shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.