Swathy Krishna v. State of Kerala

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: C.S. Dias
Judgment Date: 2024-02-13
Court Decision / Holding: The application is allowed; bail is granted on a bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties for similar sums, subject to conditions: appear before the Investigating Officer every Saturday for three months (or until final report), refrain from any inducement or tampering with evidence, refrain from committing offences while on bail, surrender passport if any, and amendments/cancellation rights on violation. The order also cites Sushila Aggarwal for the scope of bail conditions and continued investigation. The petitioner is to be released on the terms set.
Final Disposition: Bail granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

SWATHY KRISHNA

Respondents

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Francis Assisi
• Ajeesh S.Brite
• T.D.Robin
• Amrutha P S

Counsels for Respondents

• SMT Neema T V (Public Prosecutor)

Case Synopsis & Summary

Swathy Krishna, the sole accused in Crime No.01/2024 of Kalady Excise Range Office, Ernakulam, moved a bail application under Section 439 CrPC, challenging charges under Sections 20(b)(ii)(A) and 22(b) of the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 2.781 grams of MDMA and 20 grams of ganja. Arrested on 07.01.2024, she is alleged to have committed the offences and contends innocence, claiming false implication, with no prior criminal record and about a month in judicial custody. The prosecution asserts conscious possession of contraband and ongoing investigation. The court assesses whether continued detention is necessary, considering the intermediate-quantity seizure, lack of antecedents, and near completion of investigation with recoveries already made. After hearing counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor, the court finds bail warranted given the mitigating factors and the stage of the investigation, subject to stringent conditions to ensure appearance and prevent tampering with evidence. The order imposes a bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two solvent sureties, weekly appearance before the Investigating Officer for three months (or until the final report), prohibition on inducement or tampering with witnesses, surrender of passport if any, and reserve power to cancel bail for violations; modifications of conditions are permitted. The court cites the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another to justify continued investigation and recoveries during bail. Result: bail granted on stated terms, enabling release of the petitioner.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Sections 20(b)(ii)(A) and 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner asserts total innocence, alleges false implication, and points to the absence of any criminal antecedents and the temporary judicial custody. She argues the contraband quantity is intermediate and that she is willing to comply with stringent conditions to secure her release, contending that continued detention is unnecessary given the investigation’s progress.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor opposes bail, arguing that the contraband was recovered from the petitioner’s conscious possession and that the investigation is at a delicate stage; therefore bail should be refused.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another	2020 (1) KHC 663	Positive	Cited as authority supporting the use of bail conditions and continued investigation/recovery during bail.

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 ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 13[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 24TH MAGHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 625 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.01/2024 OF KALADY EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` SWATHY KRISHNA AGED 28 YEARS D/O REMA VAYANATHARA HOUSE, KAVUMPURAM, KURUPPAMPADY P.O ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 683545 ``` ``` BY ADVS. FRANCIS ASSISI AJEESH S.BRITE T.D.ROBIN AMRUTHA P S ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` BY SR PP SMT NEEMA T V ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B.A No.625 of 2024 2 Dated this the 13[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.01/2024 of the Kalady Excise Range Office, Ernakulam, registered against her for allegedly committing the offences under Sections 20(b) (ii)(A) and 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, the Act). The petitioner was arrested on 07.01.2024. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that; on 07.01.2024 around 2.15 p.m, while the excise party conducted a search at Mattur, they found that the accused in possession of 2.781 grams of MDMA and 20 grams of Ganja. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences. B.A No.625 of 2024 3 3. Heard Sri.Francis Assisi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema. T.V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against her. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last one month. Even going by the prosecution case, the contraband articles that were seized from the petitioner are of an intermediate quantity. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The petitioner is willing to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the contraband articles were seized from the conscious possession of the B.A No.625 of 2024 4 petitioner. The investigation in the case is in progress. Hence, the application may be dismissed. 6. On a consideration of the facts, the materials placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, particularly taking note of the fact that the contraband articles that were allegedly seized from the petitioner are of an intermediate quantity, that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, that the investigation in the case is practically complete and the recovery has been effected, I am of the definite view that the petitioner’s continued detention is not necessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the application. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on her 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: B.A No.625 of 2024 5 (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. She 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 her 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 she is on bail; - (iv) The petitioner shall surrender her passport, if any, before the court below at B.A No.625 of 2024 6 the time of execution of the bond. If she has no passport, she 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 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 B.A No.625 of 2024 7 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** mtk/13.02.24 B.A No.625 of 2024 8 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 625/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` ANNEXURE -I ``` ``` A TRUE COPY OF THE ADHAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER NAMELY KSHETHRA KANWAL ```