High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail granted

Ramadas and Shaindas @ Shainudas v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 11485 OF 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C. S. Dias
Judgment Date
2024-01-29
Court Decision / Holding
The petition is allowed; the petitioners are to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000 each with two solvent sureties each, subject to conditions including appearance before the Investigating Officer, not tampering with witnesses or evidence, not committing an offence, and surrender of passports if any.
Final Disposition
Bail granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Ramadas
  • Shaindas @ Shainudas

Respondents

  • State of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • V. A. Johnson (Varikkappallil)

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Neema T. V.

Case Synopsis & Summary

This bail petition under Section 439 CrPC concerns two accused in Crime No. 1034/2023 of Mankara Police Station, Palakkad, charged under NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 15.058 kilograms of ganja and Rs. 2,50,000. The petitioners were arrested on 30.11.2023; the contraband is described as intermediate quantity; the final report has not been laid. The petition contends that the investigation is practically complete and that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, so they deserve statutory bail under the proviso to Section 167(2) CrPC, given the lengthy detention (over 61 days). The Public Prosecutor did not oppose the application, conceding the contraband quantity, custodial period, and that the final report has not been laid. The court cites Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI and M. Ravindran v. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to underscore that Section 167(2) aims to expeditiously conclude investigations while preserving the rights to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence, and notes that Azharudheen v. State of Kerala holds that once statutory bail rights accrue, an oral application may suffice. On considering the materials, the judge concludes that the petitioners are entitled to statutory bail and orders their release on bond of Rs.1,00,000 each with two solvent sureties, subject to standard conditions including appearance, non-inducement, no tampering with evidence, and surrender of passports if any.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 Cr.P.C., 1973Section 20(b)(ii)B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Proviso to Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Presumption of innocence
  • Right to speedy investigation / expeditious investigation under Article 21 of the Constitution
  • Once statutory bail rights accrue, the bail can be granted even on oral application (Azharudheen v. State of Kerala)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contended they have been falsely implicated; they have been in judicial custody since 30.11.2023 (over 61 days); investigation is practically complete; contraband is of intermediate quantity; thus they are entitled to statutory bail under the proviso to Section 167(2) CrPC. They argued for release pending final report.

Contentions of Respondents

The State opposed the bail but conceded that the contraband is of intermediate quantity, petitioners have been in custody since 30.11.2023, and the final report has not been laid, arguing that bail should not be granted automatically without considering the risk and evidence.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation[(2022) 10 SCC 51]PositiveCited to emphasize that Section 167(2) is to expedite investigation while protecting the right to fair trial and presumption of innocence.
M. Ravindran v. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence[(2021) 2 SCC 485]PositiveCited to support that the right to bail cannot be taken away even during unforeseen circumstances, reinforcing statutory bail protections.
Azharudheen v. State of Kerala(2024 (1) KHC 309)PositiveCited to note that once statutory bail rights accrue, even an oral application can suffice to enlarge on bail.

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 Ramadas and Shaindas @ Shainudas 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 ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 29[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 9TH MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 11485 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1034/2023 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 6056/2023 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD ``` ## `PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 AND 2:` ``` 1 RAMADAS AGED 50 YEARS S/O.SAHADEVAN, KONNAYATH HOUSE, VELLAROAD, MANKARA, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678613 2 SHAINDAS @ SHAINUDAS AGED 42 YEARS /O.RAMANKUTTY, CHIRAKKULAM, PALLIYALIL HOUSE, VENGASSERY, AMBALAPPARA, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679516 ``` ``` BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) ``` ## `RESPONDENT/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:` ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031 ``` ``` BY SR PP SMT NEEMA T V ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B. A. No. 11485 of 2023 2 Dated this the 29[th] day of January, 2024 ## **ORDER** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.1034/2023 of the Mankara Police Station, Palakkad, registered against the accused (four in number) for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)B of the Narcotic Drugs and . Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, the Act) The petitioners were arrested on 30.11.2023. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that: around 5.30 p.m, on 30.11.2023, the accused 1 to 4 were found in possession of 15.058 kilograms of Ganja and Rs.2,50,000/- in a building bearing No.7/282 of Mankara Panchayat at a place called Karattuparambu. Thus, the accused have committed the above offence. B. A. No. 11485 of 2023 3 3. Heard; Sri.V.A.Johnson (Varikkappallil)., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 30.11.2023, which is more than 61 days. The final report has not been laid. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents. The investigation in the case is practically complete. The contraband is of intermediate quantity. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to be released on statutory bail in view of the proviso to Sub Section (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code', for short). Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. Nonetheless, she conceded that the contraband is of intermediate quantity, that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since B. A. No. 11485 of 2023 4 30.11.2023, that the final report has not been laid, and that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. 6. Indisputably, the petitioners were arrested on 30.11.2023, the contraband that was seized from the petitioners is of intermediate quantity, and the final report has not been laid. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to compulsive bail as contemplated in the proviso to Sub Section (2) of Section 167 of the Code. 7. Dealing with an identical issue the Honourable Supreme Court in **Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation** [(2022) 10 SCC 51], has held in the following manner: “39. S.167(2) was introduced in the year 1978, giving emphasis to the maximum period of time to complete the investigation. This provision has got a laudable object behind it, which is to ensure an expeditious investigation and a fair trial, and to set down a rationalised procedure that protects the interests of the indigent sections of society. This is also another limb of Art.21. Presumption of innocence is also inbuilt in this provision. An investigating agency has to expedite the process of investigation as a suspect is languishing under incarceration. Thus, a duty is enjoined upon the agency to complete the investigation within the time prescribed and a failure would enable the release of the accused. The right enshrined is an absolute and indefeasible one, inuring to the benefit of suspect. B. A. No. 11485 of 2023 5 40.Such a right cannot be taken away even during any unforeseen circumstances, such as the recent pandemic, as held by this Court in M. Ravindran v. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence [(2021) 2 SCC 485] ………………..” ## 8. This Court in **Azharudheen V. State of Kerala** **(2024 (1) KHC 309)** has held that once the statutory right of the accused accrues, even an oral application is sufficient to enlarge him on bail. 9. On an overall consideration of the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of the fact that the final report was not laid within the stipulated time period, I am of the view that the petitioners are entitled to be released on statutory bail as contemplated under Section 167(2) of the Code. 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) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, which shall be subject to the following conditions: B. A. No. 11485 of 2023 6 - (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; - (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 jurisdictional Court or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; - (iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; - (iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passports, if any, before the jurisdictional Court at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passports, they shall file affidavits 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 B. A. No. 11485 of 2023 7 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. Sd/- **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** mtk/29.01.24 B. A. No. 11485 of 2023 8 ## `APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 11485/2023` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` ANNEXURE 1ORDER DATED 19-12-2023 IN CRMC 6056/2023 ON DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD ```