Vishnu Vinod 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 bail application is allowed; petitioner to be released on bail on a bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two solvent sureties; subject to conditions: appearance before the Investigating Officer on Saturdays for three months or until final report; shall not induce or tamper with witnesses or evidence; shall not commit any offence while on bail; surrender of passport if any; non-compliance may lead to cancellation of bail; the IO may conduct further investigation and recoveries as permitted by law; reference to the guiding principle from Sushila Aggarwal.
Final Disposition: Granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Vishnu Vinod

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• D. Vimal Dev
• Giffin Shaloo

Counsels for Respondents

• Smt.Seetha S., Senior Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

Vishnu Vinod, the third accused in Crime No. 6/2023 of the Excise Range Office, Vadanappally, seeks bail under Section 439 CrPC in a case arising under the NDPS Act for alleged possession of contraband subsequently identified as methamphetamine. The case began with patrolling on 14.02.2023 when the first accused was found in possession of 1.042 g of MDMA; the second accused was later found in conscious possession of 8.02 g and an additional 2.041 g on the motorcycle, totaling 11.11 g. The prosecution initially invoked Section 22(b)(ii)(C) but, after chemical analysis at RCC Kakkanad, the contraband was found to be methamphetamine, leading to an amendment to Section 22(b)(ii)(B) and the status of the quantity as intermediate. The petitioner has remained in judicial custody since 11.01.2024. He contends misdirection or false implication, asserts no direct evidence tying him to the contraband, and argues that the investigation is substantially complete and the factual basis is weak. The Public Prosecutor concedes the altered charge and notes no prior criminal record of the petitioner, while submitting that investigation continues. After considering the materials, the court finds no antecedents, recognizes the intermediate quantity, and notes practical completion of the investigation, justifying bail. Consequently, the application is allowed with conditions: Rs.1,00,000 bond with two sureties, appearance before IO, no tampering, surrender of passport if any, and other usual bail conditions, with reference to Sushila Aggarwal for guiding principle.

Provisions of Law Cited

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

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends false implication, asserts innocence; there is nothing on record to establish his involvement; alleges contraband seized from accused 1 and 2; claims investigation is essentially complete and there is no basis for detention; prays for bail.

Contentions of Respondents

Prosecution concedes chemical analysis revised to methamphetamine; charge updated; asserts investigation remains in progress and that the matter involves an intermediate quantity; acknowledges petitioner's lack of antecedents but urges cautious exercise of discretion in granting bail.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another	2020 (1) KHC 663	Positive	Cited to support the proposition that bail can be granted with conditions and that police may continue investigation and effect recoveries even while bail is in place.

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. 903 OF 2024** ## **CRIME NO.6/2023 OF Vadanappally Police Station, Thrissur** ## **PETITIONER/S:** VISHNU VINOD AGED 22 YEARS S/O VINOD, THERAMBATH HOUSE, MANNUTHI POST, THRISSUR, PIN - 680651 BY ADVS. D.VIMAL DEV GIFFIN SHALOO ## **RESPONDENT/S:** STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ## **OTHER PRESENT:** SR PP SMT SEETHA S THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL. NO. 903 OF 2024 2 ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the 3[rd] accused in Crime No.6/2023 of the Excise Range Office, Vadanappally, registered against the accused (three in number) for allegedly committing the offence under Section 22(b) (ii) (B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, 'NDPS Act'). The petitioner was arrested on 11.01.2024. 2. The gist of the prosecution case is that: on 14.02.2023 at around 2.20 p.m., during the patrolling duty of the Excise Inspector, Vadanappalli, they found the 1[st] accused in possession of 1.042 grams of MDMA. The 1[st] accused disclosed that the accused 2 and 3 who were seated on a motor cycle in a nearby place were involved. On seeing the party, the 3[rd] accused took to his heels. In the search, that was conducted by the Investigating Officer, he found the 2[nd] accused in conscious possession of 8.02 grams of MDMA and from BAIL APPL. NO. 903 OF 2024 3 the motor cycle of the 1[st] accused, a further quantity of 2.041 grams was also seized. Thus, a total of 11.11 grams of MDMA was seized from the accused. Thus, the accused have committed the above offence. 3. Heard; Sri.D.Vimal Dev, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha S., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the crime. He is totally innocent of the accusation levelled against him. There is nothing to establish that the petitioner has committed the offence alleged against him. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 11.01.2024. The petitioner has reliably learnt that the contraband that was seized from the accused 1 and 2 is not MDMA as alleged by the prosecution. The investigation in the crime is practically complete and recovery has been effected. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the BAIL APPL. NO. 903 OF 2024 4 application. She contended that the investigation in the case is in progress. Nonetheless, she fairly conceded to the fact that in the chemical analysis that was conducted at the Regional Chemical Examiners Laboratory, Kakkanad, it has turned out that the contraband seized from the accused 1 and 2 is methamphetamine and not MDMA. Consequently, the charge has been altered from Section 22(b) (ii) (C) to Section 22(b) (ii) (B) of the NDPS Act. Therefore, the quantity is of an intermediate quantity. She also conceded to the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. 6. On a consideration of the facts, the materials placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, especially taking into account the fact that the petitioner is a person without criminal antecedents, that the contraband that was allegedly seized from the accused 1 and 2 is of an intermediate quantity, that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 11.01.2024 and that the investigation in the case is practically complete, I am of the definite view that the petitioner is BAIL APPL. NO. 903 OF 2024 5 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 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of three 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the BAIL APPL. NO. 903 OF 2024 6 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. - (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 BAIL APPL. NO. 903 OF 2024 7 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/13.02.24 BAIL APPL. NO. 903 OF 2024 8 ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 903/2024** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE COPY OF THE ORDER OF HON'BLE SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR IN CRL.MP. NO 541 OF 2024 DATED 27.01.2024