Karnataka HC rejects bail to truck owner for transporting 93 kg ganja

The petitioner contended that he was only the owner-cum-driver of the truck transporting the coconut load and was not aware that there was ganja in the truck

The High Court has refused bail to a transporter accused of concealing ganja in a coconut-laden truck.

The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) personnel arrested Zakir Hussain, the accused, and seized 93.8 kg ganja concealed in the jute gunny bags beneath a load of coconuts.

Hussain, a resident of Upparpalya in Kunigal taluk of Tumakuru district, was intercepted near Devanahalli in the wee hours of April 9, 2021. His bail petition was rejected by the High Court on July 14, 2021. He moved the High Court later contending that the investigation is over and the entire material is available on record, including the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report.

The petitioner contended that he was only the owner-cum-driver of the truck transporting the coconut load and he was not aware that there was ganja in the truck. It was also argued that while the sample was drawn on April 12, 2021, the FSL report was received only on June 11, 2021, which is not within 15 days and is thus in violation of the Standing Instructions.

Justice Mohammed Nawaz noted Section 37 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act regulates the grant of bail in cases involving offences, particularly when offences involve commercial quantity. With regard to compliance with provisions of the NDPS Act, the court said that such presumptions can be rebutted only during evidence and not at the stage of bail petitions.

“The accused has been found transporting ganja in his vehicle and at this stage, the material collected is sufficient to show that he had real knowledge of the nature of substance concealed in the jute gunny bags beneath a load of coconuts.”

Hence, taking into consideration all the above, this court is of the considered view that, a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner and it cannot be said at this stage that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence alleged against him,” the court said.