Read Time: 09 minutes

“The offences prescribed under the NDPS Act are not only a menace to a particular individual but to the entire society especially, the youth of the country,” observed Delhi High Court while rejecting a bail plea under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

The High Court rejected the bail plea of a man who was arrested after the police recovered a large amount of contraband (975.5 kg of poppy straw) from his godown at village Jagatpur.

The single judge bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh noted that, the contraband recovered from the rented premises of one Vikas Kumar was commercial in nature and hence the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) Act are attracted in his case.

The application was preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for seeking regular bail under Sections 15, 61 and 85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Wazirabad, Delhi.

On the ground of parity, it was argued that the other co-accused who were released on bail were caught with intermediate quantities. On the other hand, the applicant was in possession of the premises from which the large quantity of the contraband was recovered. It was said that these circumstances prima facie establish the role of the applicant in the said offence.

“Such offences have a cascading effect and are in vogue these days, thus destroying the capabilities and lives of a big chunk of the population and trend has been growing over the years. Therefore, in order to prevent the devastating impact on the people of the nation, Parliament in its wisdom deemed it fit to introduce stringent conditions for grant of bail under the Act,” the bench added.

Further while rejecting the bail the bench noted, “As far as the question of parity while granting bail with respect to other co-accused is concerned, the two cannot be treated equally for the reason that there is a big difference in the quantum of the recovery made in their cases respectively.”

Hence, according to the bench the rigours of Section 37 were not satisfied in the instant case.

Background

On February 5, 2019, two constables of the Delhi Police were on patrolling duty in Wazirabad when they saw two persons on a motorcycle with one blackish-grey plastic bag placed between them.

Both these individuals after seeing the police party tried to escape by taking a U-turn and were intercepted by the police officials and asked to show the contents of the plastic ‘katta’.

The ‘katta’ was in a sealed condition, which upon being torn was found to contain poppy husk. Information of the chance recovery was transmitted to the police station, upon which the police team arrived at the spot. The two accused were arrested and the recovered katta was found to weigh 25 kilos.

During the course of investigation, the two accused apprehended with the poppy husk, made disclosure naming Vikas Kumar as the source of the contraband and divulged details of the godown situated in village Jagatpur where the poppy straw was stored by the supplier.

Following this, one police raiding team reached at the disclosed address, where two rooms were found locked which were broken open. From one room a weighing machine and one grinding machine were taken into police possession. From the other room 975.5 kilos of poppy straw was seized.

Kumar had in his bail plea argued to be released on bail, as the two co-accused from whom recovery had been made earlier were granted regular bail.

(Law point:  Section 37 of NDPS Act - Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable –

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),-

(a) Every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable;

(b) no person accused of an offence punishable for offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless—

(i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and

(ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail.)

Cause Title: Vikas Kumar vs State of NCT of Delhi