High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2024-03-12Bail Granted / Application Allowed

Ajad Biswas and Shahid Alam Biswas v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: C.S. Dias
Judgment Date: 2024-03-12
Court Decision / Holding: The application is allowed; the petitioners are to be released on bail on bond for Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties of like amount, subject to conditions (i)–(ix) including regular appearance before the Investigating Officer, non-tampering with witnesses/evidence, prohibition on offences during bail, surrender of passport if any, provision of present address and mobile numbers, restriction from leaving the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of Session, Palakkad, and a provision for cancellation of bail on violation. The court also notes the possibility of further investigation and recoveries during bail in line with Sushila Aggarwal and Hussainara Khatoon principles.
Final Disposition: Bail Granted / Application Allowed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Ajad Biswas
Shahid Alam Biswas

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• H. Nujumudeen
• Rekha M.M
• P. M. Mohammed Hassan
• Simi M
• Jacob Sherin
• Achu Ninan
• Nashla Mol
• T.A.

Counsels for Respondents

• C.S. Hrithwik

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a bail application under Section 439 CrPC before the Kerala High Court by two accused in Crime No.113/2024 of Palakkad Town South Police Station. The petitioners were arrested on 21 January 2024 and are accused of offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 14.355 kilograms of ganja from a bus at Kazchaparambu, Palakkad. The applicants contend they are falsely implicated and maintain their innocence. They have been in judicial custody since 21 January 2024, the contraband is described as an intermediate quantity, and the investigation is reportedly practically complete with recovery effected. The public prosecutor opposes bail, arguing the petitioners hail from West Bengal with no roots in Kerala, raising the likelihood of flight if enlarged on bail; however, he concedes the contraband quantity is intermediate and that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. After considering the materials, the court finds detention unnecessary and, while allowing bail, imposes stringent conditions to ensure appearance and prevent tampering with evidence. The order relies on Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1980) SCC 98 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi (as cited) to justify liberty with conditions. The bail bond is fixed at Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties, and conditions include regular IO appearances, no tampering, passport surrender, and restrictions on travel within Kerala, among others.

Provisions of Law Cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 439Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1980) SCC 98 (principle supporting liberty and bail considerations)
Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi and another (2020 (1) KHC 663) (bail may be granted with conditions and investigations can continue)
Bail is the general rule; detention is exception; liberty of the individual treated as paramount

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. Detention since 21.01.2024 is unnecessary since the contraband is an intermediate quantity and investigation is practically complete with recovery effected. They emphasize their lack of criminal antecedents and urge the Court to grant bail under stringent conditions to secure their appearance and avoid unnecessary incarceration pending trial.

Contentions of Respondents

The State contends that the petitioners hail from West Bengal with no roots in Kerala, creating a real likelihood of fleeing if released on bail. While conceding the contraband is an intermediate quantity and that the petitioners have no prior criminal record, the State argues against bail to maintain public order and ensure cooperation with investigation.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar	1980 (1) SCC 98	Positive	Cited to justify liberty-based bail considerations and impose conditions to prevent abuse, aligning with the principle that detention should not be unduly prolonged when charges are not backed by strong grounds.
Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi and another	2020 (1) KHC 663	Positive	cited to support that investigation can continue and recoveries can be effected even while on bail, and that bail can be granted with appropriate conditions.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Ajad Biswas and Shahid Alam Biswas v. State of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **TUESDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1945** **BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024** **CRIME NO.113/2024 OF Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad PETITIONER/S:** **1 AJAD BISWAS AGED 20 YEARS S/O .TITTU BISWAS ,CHOUAPARA, DURALAVERPARA, JALANGI , MURSHIDABAD,WEST BENGAL, PIN - 742149** **2 SHAHID ALAM BISWAS AGED 23 YEARS S/O RABIUL BISWAS , CHOUAPARA, MADHUBONA, JALANGUL, MURSHIDABAD,WEST BENGAL, PIN - 742149** **BY ADVS. H.NUJUMUDEEN REKHA.M.M P.M.MOHAMMED HASSAN SIMI M JACOB SHERIN ACHU NINAN NASHLA MOL T.A.** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024 2 ## **ORDER** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.113/2024 of the Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad, registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘the Act’). The petitioners were arrested on 21.01.2024. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 21.01.2024 at about 9 am, the accused 1 and 2 were found in possession of 14.355 kilograms of ganja at a place named Kazchaparambu in a bus bearing No.PY-01-CT 8433. The accused were apprehended with the contraband then and there from the spot. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri. H.Nujumudeen, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024 3 that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusation levelled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. Notwithstanding the other contentions raised in the application, the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 21.01.2024, the contraband allegedly seized from the petitioners is of an intermediate quantity, the investigation in the case is practically complete and recovery has been effected. Therefore, the petitioners' further detention is unnecessary. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He contended that the petitioners hail from the State of West Bengal. They have no roots in the State of Kerala. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of them fleeing from justice. Therefore, the application may be dismissed. Nonetheless, he conceded to the fact that the contraband that is allegedly seized from the petitioners is of an intermediate quantity and that the petitioners, as of date, have no criminal antecedents. BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024 4 6. The crux of the prosecution allegation is that the petitioners were found in possession of an intermediate quantity of ganja and were arrested then and there from the spot. 7. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and taking note of the fact that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, that the contraband that was allegedly seized from the petitioners is of an intermediate quantity, that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 21.01.2024, that the investigation in the case is practically complete and recovery has been effected, I am of the definite view that the petitioners' further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application, but subject to stringent conditions, especially that the petitioners shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of Session, Palakkad, as they have no roots in the State of Kerala and as laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in **Hussainara Khatoon vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar** [1980 (1) BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024 5 SCC 98]. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions: : (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Tuesday and Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. They shall also report before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday till the conclusion of the proceedings in the above crime. (ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; (iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024 6 they are on bail; (iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passport, they shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; (v) The petitioners shall furnish their present address and mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer as well as before the jurisdictional Court. (vi) The petitioners shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of Session, Palakkad without previous permission of the said court. (vii) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. (viii) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below. BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024 7 (ix) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi and another** [2020 (1) KHC 663]. **Sd/-** **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** rkc/12.03.24 BAIL APPL. NO. 1778 OF 2024 8 ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1778/2024** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** **Annexure 1** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 113/2024 OF TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DATED 21.01.2024** **Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MC NO. 706/2024 DATED 15.02.2024**