C.S.Dias, J
1. The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the 3rd accused in Crime No.872/2023 of the Ottappalam Police Station, Palakkad, registered against the accused (four in number) for allegedly committing the offences under Sections 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, ‘NDPS Act’). The petitioner was arrested on 15.08.2023 and he was released on interim bail in the instant application on 30.10.2023.
2. The crux of the prosecution case is that; on 15.08.2023, at around 5.45 p.m., the accused 1 to 4 were found in possession of 16.210 grams of MDMA for the purpose of sale. The accused were arrested then and there on the spot with the contraband article. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.
3. Heard Sri. V.A.Vinod, 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 accusation levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. The petitioner was arrested on 15.08.2023 and was released on interim bail by this Court on 30.10.2023 as the Investigating Officer failed to produce the Chemical Analysis report despite repeated directions passed by this Court. The petitioner has reliably learnt that, as per the Chemical Analysis report, the contraband article allegedly seized from the petitioner is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is only of an intermediate quantity. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She contended that the investigation of the case is not complete. Nonetheless, she handed over the chemical analysis report dated 21.11.2023 of the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Thrissur, which substantiates that the contraband article is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'.
6. The prosecution was lodged against the accused principally on the allegation that the accused were found in possession of 16.210 grams of 'MDMA', which is of a commercial quantity. It is on the basis of the said accusation, that the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Subsequently, by order dated 30.10.2023, this Court released the petitioner on interim bail for the non-production of the chemical analysis report. Now, as per the chemical analysis report dated 21.11.2023 of the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Thrissur, the contraband article is 'methamphetamine' and not 'MDMA'. Therefore, the contraband is only of an intermediate quantity. Indisputably, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
7. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the facts, the materials placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, particularly after going through the chemical analysis report dated 21.11.2023, which shows that the contraband allegedly seized from the accused is of an intermediate quantity, that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and further this Court had already released the petitioner on interim bail on 30.10.2023, I am of the definite view that the petitioner’s continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, the interim bail order dated 30.10.2023 is made absolute, subject to the further following conditions.
(i) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail;
(ii) Application for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be filed and entertained before the court below.
(iii) 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].
This order shall be read in conjunction with the interim order dated 30.10.2023.
