High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2023-12-11Bail Granted

Rajesh v. State of Kerala; Ranju v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 2303 OF 2022; Bail Appl. NO. 1901 OF 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Mohammed Nias C.P.
Judgment Date: 2023-12-11
Court Decision / Holding: The applications are allowed. The petitioners Rajesh and Ranju are to be released on bail on the following conditions: (i) separate bonds of Rs. 50,000 each with two solvent sureties of Rs. 50,000 each; (ii) report to the Investigating Officer as directed; (iii) not tamper with or influence witnesses or recoveries; (iv) not engage in any other crime while on bail; (v) surrender any passports within seven days of release (with provision to file appropriate applications if passport is needed later); (vi) furnish present address and mobile numbers to the court and IO; (vii) if any condition is violated, bail may be cancelled as per law.
Final Disposition: Bail Granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Rajesh
Ranju

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
Station House Officer, Koratty Police Station, Thrissur

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• K. Vinaya
• Ravi Krishnan
• A. P. Vasavan
• P. Jinish Paul

Counsels for Respondents

• M. C. Ashi

Case Synopsis & Summary

These bail applications arise from Crime No. 705/2021 of Koratty Police Station, Thrissur, under the NDPS Act (sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 27 and 29) and involve two accused—Rajesh (accused No.1) in BA No. 2303/2022 and Ranju (accused No.2) in BA No. 1901/2022—seized with 20.854 kilograms of ganja on 12 August 2021 while travelling in KL-39-G4860. Both petitions seek regular bail under Section 439 CrPC, contending innocence and false implication; they have been in custody since 12 August 2021. The State Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Court notes no reported antecedents for either petitioner and that the quantity is just above the commercial quantity; the prosecution does not show absconding risk if released. Relying on Supreme Court decisions (Dheeraj Kumar Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh; MD Raja v. State of West Bengal) and this Court’s decisions (Banash Basheer v. State of Kerala; Siddarth v. State of Kerala; Fasil v. State of Kerala), the Court holds that the rigour of Section 37 NDPS Act can be diluted in these circumstances. Consequently, the applications are allowed and the petitioners may be released on bail on stipulated conditions, including bonds, regular reporting, non-tampering with witnesses or evidence, no new crimes, surrender of any passports, furnishing current address and mobile numbers, with the court retaining power to cancel bail for violations.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal ProcedureSections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 27 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Dilution of the rigour placed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act
Bail jurisprudence under the NDPS Act (reliance on Supreme Court precedents)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Petitioners contend innocence and false implication; they have been in custody since 12.08.2021 and seek regular bail under Section 439 CrPC; highlight lack of antecedents and absence of flight risk; submit that the rigour of NDPS bail should be diluted in appropriate facts.

Contentions of Respondents

Prosecution opposed bail, highlighting NDPS offence involving substantial quantity; oppose laxity in bail; contend need to maintain NDPS Act rigour; rely on factual circumstances and absence of imminent danger of absconding to the contrary; court to weigh competing interests.

Cited Precedents (5)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Dheeraj Kumar Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh	SLP Criminal No.6690/2022	Positive	Cited to justify relaxation of the stringent NDPS bail norms under Section 37 in appropriate circumstances.
MD Raja and another v. State of West Bengal	SLP Criminal No.6690/2022	Positive	Cited as supportive authority for diluting rigour under NDPS bail provisions.
Banash Basheer v. State of Kerala	B.A.No.5370/2023	Positive	Cited for this Court’s precedent in similar bail contexts under NDPS.
Siddarth v. State of Kerala and another	B.A.No.4109/2023	Positive	Cited to reinforce granting bail under comparable NDPS circumstances.
Fasil v. State of Kerala	[2023 (3) KHC 212]	Positive	Cited as Authority supporting NDPS bail dilution in relevant facts.

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 Rajesh v. State of Kerala; Ranju 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 MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. MONDAY, THE 11[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, ``` ## **`1945`** ## **`BAIL APPL. NO. 2303 OF 2022`** ## **`CRIME NO.705/2021 OF Koraty Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONER:`** ``` RAJESH, AGED 40 YEARS SON OF VELAYUDHAN,MELEPARAMBU HOUSE, MANKURUSSY DESOM, MANKARA VILLAGE, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678613 BY ADVS. K.VINAYA RAVI KRISHNAN A.P.VASAVAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2STATION HOUSE OFFICER, STATION HOUSE OFFICER,KORATTY POLICE STATION,THRISSUR, PIN - 680308 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, M.C.Ashi ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.12.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1901/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **BA.Nos.2303 &1901 of 2022** ..2.. ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. MONDAY, THE 11[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 1901 OF 2022 CRIME NO.705/2021 OF Koraty Police Station, Thrissur AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRMP 501/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` RANJU AGED 39 YEARS S/O. LONAPPAN, ARAKKAL MALAKKARAN (H), KIZHAKE POTTA DESOM, KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, THRISSUR-., PIN - 680307 ``` ``` BY ADV P.JINISH PAUL ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SRI.M.C.ASHI, PP ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.12.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..2303/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **BA.Nos.2303 &1901 of 2022** ..3.. ## **MOHAMMED NIAS C. P. , J. =========================** **B. A. Nos.1901 and 2303 of 2022** **=========================** **Dated this the 11th day of December, 2023** ## **O R D E R** These applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail. 2. The petitioner in B.A.No.2303/2022 is accused No.1 while the petitioner in B.A.No.1901/2022 is accused No.2 in Crime No. 705/2021 of Koratty Police Station for having committed offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c), 25, 27 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for Short ‘NDPS Act’). 3. The prosecution case is that, on 12.08.2011 at 10.45 a.m., the police party seized 20.854 kilograms of Ganga, which was being transported by accused Nos.1 and 2 in a vehicle bearing registration No.KL-39-G4860, and thereby, the accused have committed the offences. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would say that the petitioners are totally innocent and falsely implicated with ulterior **BA.Nos.2303 &1901 of 2022** ..4.. motives. At any rate, they point out that the petitioners have been in custody since 12/08/2021, and continued custody of them is unnecessary. 5. The learned public prosecutor opposed the petition. 6. After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and considering the fact that they have been detained since 12.08.2021, no antecedents have been reported against them, the quantity involved being just above the commercial quantity and also since the prosecution raises no apprehension that if released on bail the petitioners are likely to abscond, I am inclined to dilute the rigour placed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act relying on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in **Dheeraj Kumar Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh (SLP Criminal No.6690/2022)** , **MD Raja and another v. State of West Bengal (SLP Criminal No.6690/2022)** and of this Court in **Banash Basheer v. State of Kerala (B.A.No.5370/2023), Siddarth v. State of Kerala and another (B.A.No.4109/2023) and Fasil v. State of Kerala [2023 (3) KHC 212]** , these applications are allowed and the petitioners can be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:- **BA.Nos.2303 &1901 of 2022** ..5.. (i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on executing separate bonds for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court; (ii) The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed; (iii) The petitioners shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses; (iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail. (v) The petitioners shall surrender their passports, if any, within seven days from the date of their release before the Court concerned and if the release of the passports is required at a later period, the petitioners shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for the same before the court having jurisdiction. If they have no passport, they shall file an affidavit to that effect before the court concerned, on the date of execution of the bond or within three days thereafter. (vi) The petitioners shall furnish their present address along with **BA.Nos.2303 &1901 of 2022** **==> picture [20 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** their mobile phone number to the court concerned as well as to the Investigating Officer. (vii) If any of the conditions are violated, the court concerned will be empowered to take steps for cancellation of bail as per law; Sd/- **MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.** **JUDGE** ACR **BA.Nos.2303 &1901 of 2022** ..7.. ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2303/2022`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.1.2022 IN CRL.M.P. NO. 3288/2021 OF FIRST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR Annexure A2CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATE 16.2.2022 IN CRL.M.P. NO. 471/2022 OF FIRST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR Annexure A3CITIZENS COPY OF CRIME NO.705/2021 DATED 12.82021 ON THE FILES KORATTY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR ``` **BA.Nos.2303 &1901 of 2022** ..8.. ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1901/2022`** ||**`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1901/2022`**| |---|---| |`PETITIONER`|`ANNEXURES`| |`Annexure1`|`THE TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT`| ||`DATED 14.08.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE`| ||`INVESTIGATING OFFICER`| |`Annexure2`|`THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDERS IN`| ||`CRL.M.P.NO.2737/2021 ON THE FILES OF`| ||`THE SESSIONS JUDGE, THRISSUR`| |`Annexure3`|`THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN`| ||`CRL.M.P.NO.501/2022 ON THE FILES OF`| ||`THE SESSIONS JUDGE, THRISSUR`| |`Annexure4`|`THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL`| ||`CERTIFICATE 02.11.2021 ISSUED FROM`| ||`AMALA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES,`| ||`THRISSUR`|