Muhammed Rashid v. State of Kerala

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS THURSDAY, THE 29[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 10TH PHALGUNA, ``` ``` 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 1387 OF 2024 CRIME NO.2/2024 OF TIRUR EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, MALAPPURAM ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` MUHAMMED RASHID AGED 30 YEARS S/O KUNJ MUHAMMED, CHANDRATHIL HOUSE, MUTHOOR, THRIKANDAYOOR, TIRUR, PIN - 676104 BY ADVS. SADIQALI.M DHANYA S NAIR DELLA ABRAHAM NIMA MERIYAM KOSHY SHAMNAD.E. MOHAMED SHAFI M. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV SMT NEEMA T V – SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.1387 OF 2024 ``` ## **C.S.DIAS, J.** **-------------------------------------------------------B.A. No. 1387 OF 2024 ------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 29[th] day of February, 2024** ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the sole accused in Crime No.2/2024 of the Tirur Excise Range Office, Malappuram registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 22(b), 8(c) read with Section 20(b) ii(A) and 60(3) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act (NDPS Act), 1985. The petitioner was arrested on 09.01.2024. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 08.01.2024 at around 16.00 hours, the Excise Range Inspector, Tirur received an information that the ``` 3 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO.1387 OF 2024 ``` petitioner is in possession of contraband articles with him. Accordingly, the detecting officer conducted a search on the petitioner and found 2.94 grams of MDMA and 10 grams of cannabies from his motor cycle bearing No.KL 54 N 0821. Thus, the accused has committed the above offence. 3. Heard; Sri. Sadiqalim 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. At any rate, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 09.01.2024, which is 51 days, that petitioner has no any criminal antecedents, that the contraband articles that were allegedly seized are of an intermediate quantity, the investigation in the ``` 4 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.1387 OF 2024`** case is practically complete and recovery has been effected. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the investigation is in progress. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents and that the recovery has been effected. 6. On an anxious consideration to the facts, the materials placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, particularly taking note of the fact that, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 09.01.2024, that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, the contraband that was allegedly seized from the petitioner is of an intermediate quantity, that the investigation in the case is practically complete, and that the recovery has been effected, I am of the ``` 5 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.1387 OF 2024`** definite view that the petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I 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.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 petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is filed, 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 ``` 6 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.1387 OF 2024`** acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any 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 before the court below at the time of - any, 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; ``` 7 ``` ## **`BAIL APPL. NO.1387 OF 2024`** vi. Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below; 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.1387 OF 2024`** ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1387/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1A TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT IN CRIME NO.2/2024 DATED 9-01-2024 ``` ``` RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURS: NIL ```