AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.S. Satheesachandran, J.—Petitioners are two among the accused (A2 & A3) in Crime No. 281 of 2013 of Pulpalli Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(iii)(c) r/w. 25A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short "the NDPS Act"). That crime is now in investigation. Petitioners seek their release on bail moving the above petition u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code"). I heard counsel for petitioners and also learned public prosecutor. Allegation is that on getting reliable information that the accused persons, three in number are engaged in transiting ganja, a narcotic substance, illicitly from a neighbourhood State, police party reached the spot and then all the three accused persons were found together with one of them possessing a sack. The accused possessing the sack, A1, it is stated took out from the sack two packets and handed one each to the other accused, A2 and A3, petitioners herein. At that juncture, police party moved in to apprehend the accused persons, but all of them took to their heels and made good their escape leaving behind the contraband possessed by them. Search over the bag and also the packets revealed that it was ganja. 10.700 kgms. of ganja was found in the sack and packets. Samples were collected preparing a mahazar complying with the formalities. Returning with contraband to station, the crime was registered. Petitioners 2 and 3 in the crime were arrested on 02.07.2013, and, on their production before special judge they were remanded to judicial custody, which still continues.
Learned counsel for petitioners inviting my attention to the mahazar prepared over the seizure of contraband contended that the allegations imputed that petitioner collected packets of ganja from the first accused are totally false. No packet had been seized separately when mahazar was prepared by investigating agency, which refers only to seizure of sack containing ganja, is the submission of counsel. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the crime, is the further submission of counsel to urge for granting them bail. Opposing the application learned public prosecutor submitted that materials gathered by investigating agency disclose complicity of all accused persons in the illicit trafficking of ganja. Both petitioners are previous convicts for offences under the NDPS Act, is the further submission of learned public prosecutor to oppose the application. Case diary has been produced for my perusal. After perusing the case diary with reference to the submissions made by counsel on both sides, it appears, the quantity of ganja seized in the case comes within intermediate quantity and not commercial quantity. At this stage submissions made by learned counsel for petitioners with reference to the mahazar prepared over the seizure of the contraband cannot be given unmerited consideration where circumstances presented, prima facie, disclose complicity of the petitioners with the other accused (A1) in the crime. When investigation of the crime is in progress and circumstances presented disclose, prima facie, complicity of petitioners in the grave offences imputed, I find, they cannot be released on bail, at this stage.
Petition dismissed.