×
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

SC quashes bail granted by Madras HC to drug peddler; directs courts to avoid giving bail if large quantities seized

'In the case recovery of such a huge quantity of narcotic substance, the courts should be slow in granting even regular bail to the accused, what to talk of anticipatory bail, more so when the accused is alleged to be having criminal antecedents,' the bench said.
Last Updated : 17 February 2024, 10:04 IST

Follow Us :

Comments

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has stated that the courts should be slow in granting even regular bail, forget the possibility of anticipatory bail, in a case where a huge quantity of narcotic substances has been recovered. The apex court stressed it was even more necessary to keep the accused in custody if they allegedly have criminal antecedents.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta quashed the anticipatory bail granted to B Ramu in a case related to recovery 232.5 kg of ganja, saying the Madras High Court order is cryptic and perverse on the face of the record and cannot be sustained.

The court also objected to a "manifestly, a very strange approach" adopted by the HC's single judge in the order of anticipatory bail by directing that the appellant would deposit a sum of Rs 30,000 to the credit of the registered Tamil Nadu Advocate Clerk Association, Chennai along with various other conditions.

Such a condition "is totally alien to the principles governing bail jurisprudence and is nothing short of perversity," the bench said in its order on February 12, 2024.

Citing Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the bench said, "A plain reading of statutory provision makes it abundantly clear that in the event, the Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail either regular or anticipatory, as the case may be, the court would have to record a satisfaction that there are grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence alleged and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail."

The bench said the High Court here not only omitted to record any satisfaction, but has rather completely ignored the factum of recovery of narcotic substance, multiple times the commercial quantity.

The High Court also failed to consider the fact that the accused has criminal antecedents and was already arraigned in two previous cases under the NDPS Act, it pointed out.

"In the case recovery of such a huge quantity of narcotic substance, the courts should be slow in granting even regular bail to the accused, what to talk of anticipatory bail, more so when the accused is alleged to be having criminal antecedents," the bench said.

The court ordered the accused to surrender within 10 days while noting that after the investigation, the charge sheet has been filed against the respondent accused along with other accused persons, which fortified the plea that the court could not have recorded a satisfaction that the accused was prima facie not guilty of the offences alleged.

The case was lodged in 2021 in Erode district upon search of the house of Brinda and Kesavan and, both were found to be in possession of 232.5 kg ganja. The respondent was indicted as being the conspirator for procurement and supply of the ganja so recovered.

ADVERTISEMENT
Published 17 February 2024, 10:04 IST

Follow us on :

Follow Us

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT