High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail granted

MIDHLAJ v. STATE OF KERALA

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C. S. Dias
Judgment Date
2024-03-20
Court Decision / Holding
The court allowed the bail application, directing release on bail on a bond for Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like sum, subject to conditions: (i) appearance before the Investigating Officer on Saturdays for one month or until final report; (ii) no inducement, threat, or tampering; (iii) no commission of any offence while on bail; (iv) surrender of passport or affidavit; (v) power to cancel or modify bail for violations; (vi) modifications of bail conditions; and (vii) Investigating Officer may investigate or effect recoveries even while on bail, as supported by Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another. The order was passed by Justice C. S. Dias on 20 March 2024.
Final Disposition
Bail granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • MIDHLAJ

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
  • Station House Officer, Karunagappally Police Station, Karungappally P.O., Kollam District

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Omar Salim

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smt. Neema T. V. - Senior Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

Case: MIDHLAJ v. STATE OF KERALA. This is a bail application under Section 439 CrPC filed by the first accused in Crime No.164/2024 of Karunagapally Police Station. The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act offences charged are Section 20(b)(ii)(B) and Section 29. The prosecution case relies on seizure of 3.101 kilograms of ganja from the accused’ rented premises on 27 January 2024. The petitioner contends that he is innocent, falsely implicated, without criminal antecedents, and that the contraband represents an intermediate quantity; further, he has remained in judicial custody since 27 January 2024 and the investigation is practically complete, so further detention is unnecessary. The Public Prosecutor opposed bail, noting ongoing investigation but acknowledging lack of antecedents and the intermediate quantity; she prayed for dismissal. After hearing, the judge found no antecedents, that the recovery was effected, and the investigation was practically complete, and thus allowed the bail application. The order imposes bond of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties, and conditions including Saturdays appearances before the IO for a month or until final report, prohibition on inducement or tampering with witnesses or evidence, no offence on bail, surrender of passport or affidavit, and power to cancel or modify bail. The decision explicitly cites Supreme Court guidance in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another for the IO's authority to investigate and recover on bail. The order was delivered by Justice C. S. Dias on 20 March 2024.

Provisions of Law Cited

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

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The applicant submits that he is totally innocent and falsely implicated. He has no criminal antecedents. The contraband is of intermediate quantity. He has been in judicial custody since 27.01.2024 and the investigation is practically complete; thus, there is no necessity for continued detention. He therefore seeks bail on reasonable terms.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor opposes bail, contending that the investigation is still in progress. She acknowledges lack of antecedents and the intermediate quantity but prays for dismissal on the ground of ongoing investigation and the need to ensure fair process.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another2020 (1) KHC 663PositiveCited with approval to permit police to investigate and recover during bail, per Supreme Court guidance.

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 MIDHLAJ 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 WEDNESDAY, THE 20[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 30TH PHALGUNA, ``` ``` 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 1697 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.164/2024 OF KARUNAGAPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 24.02.2024 IN CRMC NO.304 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` MIDHLAJ AGED 23 YEARS S/O BIJU, BINSHAD MANZIL, PUNNAKULAM KULASEKHARAPURAM, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690544 BY ADV OMAR SALIM ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031`** - **`2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER KARUNAGAPALLY POLICE STATION,KARUNGAPPALLY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690518`** ``` BY ADV SMT. NEEMA T. V. - SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ``` ``` 20.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024 ``` ## **C.S.DIAS, J.** **-------------------------------------------------------B.A. No. 1697 OF 2024 ------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 20[th] day of March, 2024** ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the first accused in Crime No.164/2024 of the Karunagapally Police Station, Kollam, 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. The petitioner was arrested on 27.01.2024. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 27.01.2024, at around 9.15 hours, the accused 1 and 2, who are brothers, were found in possession of 3.101 kilo grams of ganja in their rented premises at Karunagapally. The contraband was seized from their ``` 3 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024 ``` possession. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri. Omar Salim the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Neema T. V., the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. The contraband that was allegedly seized from the accused is of an intermediate quantity. In any given case, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 27.01.2024, that the investigation in the case is practically complete and recovery has been effected. Therefore, the petitioner’s further detention is not necessary. Hence, the bail application may be allowed. ``` 4 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024 ``` 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the investigation of the case is still in progress. Nonetheless, she concealed to the fact that the petitioner does not have criminal antecedents and the contraband is of an intermediate quantity. Hence, she prayed that the application may be dismissed. 6. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar and the materials placed on record, especially taking into account the fact that the petitioner does not have criminal antecedents, the contraband that was allegedly seized from the accused is of an intermediate quantity, that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 27.01.2024, that the recovery has been effected and the investigation in the case is practically complete and, I am of the definite view that, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. Hence, I am ``` 5 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024 ``` inclined to allow the bail application. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand 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 petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of one month or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; ii) The petitioner 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any ``` 6 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024 ``` Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; v) 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; vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below; ``` 7 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024`** vii) 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 petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another** [2020 (1) KHC 663]. **Sd/C.S. DIAS JUDGE** BR ``` 8 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.1697 OF 2024`** ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1697/2024`** ``` PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure A1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM IN CRL.M.CNO.304/2024INCRIME NO.164/2024 OF KARUNAGAPALLY POLICE STATION DATED 24.02.2024 ``` ## **`RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURES: NIL`**