High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2024-05-29Bail granted

Sarath V v. State of Kerala and The Station House Officer, Kollam East Police Station

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024

Neutral Citation:/null

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: C.S. Dias
Judgment Date: 2024-05-29
Court Decision / Holding: The petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on a bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties of like amount, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, subject to conditions: (i) appearance before IO on Saturdays 9:00–11:00 AM for two months or until final report; (ii) no inducement or tampering with witnesses; (iii) no offense while on bail; (iv) surrender of passport or affidavit if none; (v) power to cancel bail on breach; (vi) modification of bail conditions permitted; and (vii) IO may investigate and recover information as needed while bail is in force per Sushila Aggarwal principle.
Final Disposition: Bail granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Sarath V, aged 25 years, S/o Vijayan, Valiyavila Tsunami Flat, Block No.16, Valiyavila Cherry, Mayyanad, Kollam, PIN 691303

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
The Station House Officer, Kollam East Police Station, Kollam District

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• C.R. Jayakumar
• Nobel Raju
• Aleena Jose

Counsels for Respondents

• Smt. Seetha S., Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

This High Court of Kerala bail application under Section 439 CrPC concerns the sole accused in Crime No. 2013/2023 of Kollam East Police Station, charged under Section 22(c) NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 16.40 grams of MDMA for sale at Kollam Railway Station on 30.12.2023. The court considers whether the petitioner, in custody since 30.12.2023, should be released on bail while the investigation is substantially complete. The prosecution initially alleged MDMA possession, but the State Forensic Science Laboratory’s report dated 16.03.2024 concluded the contraband was methamphetamine, reclassifying the quantity as intermediate rather than commercial. The defense contends innocence and alleges false implication, asserting the material is not in conscious possession of the petitioner and that the contraband is methamphetamine. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents, and the investigation is near completion; thus, detention seems unnecessary. The prosecution opposed bail, citing ongoing investigation and risk of reoffending, but furnished the chemical analysis to support its case. After weighing the submissions and the absence of antecedents, the court, though noting the corrected substance, exercises caution but grants bail, setting a bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties and standard conditions, including weekly appearances before IO, non-interference, passport surrender, and the possibility of cancellation on breach, in line with Sushila Aggarwal guidance on investigation during bail.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends innocence and non-possession. He asserts not in conscious possession and maintains the contraband is methamphetamine, not MDMA, with the quantity being intermediate rather than commercial. He emphasizes no criminal antecedents and nearly complete investigation, arguing that continued detention is unnecessary and bail should be granted with appropriate conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation.

Contentions of Respondents

The State, through the Public Prosecutor, opposed bail citing ongoing investigation and risk of reoffending if released. The prosecution furnished the State Forensic Science Laboratory’s report (dated 16.03.2024) establishing the contraband as methamphetamine, not MDMA, supporting the classification as intermediate quantity and suggesting need for cautious approach to bail.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another	2020 (1) KHC 663	Positive	The judgment is cited for permitting continued investigation and recoveries even while the accused is on bail, reflecting the balanced approach to bail 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 Sarath V v. State of Kerala and The Station House Officer, Kollam East Police Station 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 29[TH] DAY OF MAY 2024 / 8TH JYAISHTA, 1946 BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024** **CRIME NO.2013/2023 OF Kollam East Police Station, Kollam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 20.03.2024 IN CRMC NO.457 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM PETITIONER/S:** **SARATH.V AGED 25 YEARS S/O VIJAYAN, VALIYAVILA TSUNAMI FLAT, BLOCK NO.16, VALIYAVILA CHERRY, MAYYANAD, KOLLAM, PIN - 691303** **BY ADVS. C.R.JAYAKUMAR NOBEL RAJU ALEENA JOSE** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT., PIN - 690001** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SR PP SMT SEETHA S** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024 2 ## **ORDER** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the sole accused in Crime No.2013/2023 of the Kollam East Police Station, Kollam, registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘the Act’). The petitioner was arrested on 30.12.2023. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 30.12.2023, at around 20 hours, the accused was found in possession of 16.40 grams of MDMA for the purpose of sale at the Kollam Railway Station. The accused was arrested on the spot with the contraband article. Thus, the accused has committed the above offence. 3. Heard; Sri.C.R.Jayakumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha S., the learned Public Prosecutor. BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024 3 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations leveled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no material to show that the contraband was seized from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has reliably learnt that the contraband involved in the case is not 'MDMA' but only 'methamphetamine'. Therefore, the contraband is of an intermediate quantity. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail, especially since the investigation in the case is practically complete. Therefore, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the application. She submitted that the investigation in the case is in progress. She also stated that, if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of him committing similar offences. Hence, the application may be dismissed. However, the learned Public Prosecutor BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024 4 made available the chemical analysis report issued by the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Police Department, Thiruvananthapuram dated 16.03.2024 which substantiates the fact that the contraband involved in the case is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA' as alleged by the prosecution. She also stated that as per the records available with the Investigating Officer, the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. 6. The prosecution was launched against the petitioner on the allegation that he was found in possession of 16.40 grams of MDMA, which is of a commercial quantity. Indisputably, as per the chemical analysis report referred to above, the contraband has turned out to be 'methamphetamin' and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is of an intermediate quantity. It is reported that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024 5 7. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, the materials placed on record, especially on considering the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 30.12.2023, the investigation in the case is practically complete, has been effected and further that the recovery contraband involved in the case is of an intermediate quantity and the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents, I am of the view that the petitioner's further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 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 BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024 6 - 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 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 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. BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024 7 - (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** rkc/29.05.24 BAIL APPL. NO. 4302 OF 2024 8 ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 4302/2024** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** |**Annexure A1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.**| |---|---| ||**2013/2023 KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION**| ||**DATED 31.12.2023**| |**Annexure A2**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C. NO.**| ||**457/2024 DATED 20/03/2024 ON THE FILES OF**| ||**HON'BLE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM**| |**Annexure A3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN BA NO.**| ||**3508/2024 DATED 14/05/2024 ON THE FILES**| ||**OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT**|