Recovery of drugs and Bail: Case where Allahabad HC grants bail to a man accused of possessing 95 gram of drugs and few more

Allahabad High court today granted bail to a man booked under Section 8/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) allegedly from whom 95-gram Alprazolem Powder was recovered.

The counsel for the appellant had argued that the quantity of the drug recovered from the accused was less than the commercial quantity in terms of the NDPS Act.

Granting bail to Ravi Kumar, the bench of Justice Jaspreet Singh noted that no apprehension was expressed by the Government advocate that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness. Therefore, the court held,

“Hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.”

Apart from stressing that Ravi Kumar was in Jail since August this year, his counsel had also contended before the court that the police has not complied with the procedure for search as mentioned under Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act.

Accordingly, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as the nature of allegations and accusations against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration, court found Kumar's case fit for bail. 

However, court directed that Kumar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Amid the whole controversy around the Cordelia Cruise Drugs Case where Bollywood actor’s son Aryan Khan is among the accused and has faced denial of his bail plea by both the Magistrate court and Sessions court, several media reports have been surfacing that highlight multiple cases where bail has been granted by the Allahabad High Court despite recovery of huge quantity of drugs from the accused. 

Recently, on October 21, single-judge bench Allahabad High Court had granted bail to one accused who was in jail since January 18, 2019, for offences under Sections 8, 20, 29 and 60 of the NDPS Act. Allegedly, 349 kg ganja was recovered from the bail applicant. 

Granting bail in the matter, the high court had placed reliance on the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court and stated that "Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari, [(2007) 7 SCC 798] has held that the court while considering the application for bail with reference to Section 37 of the Act, is not called upon to record a finding of not guilty."

Court reiterated that It is for the limited purpose essentially confined to the question of releasing the accused on bail that the court is called upon to see if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty and records its satisfaction about the existence of such grounds.

The same Bench had, on October 22, granted bail to another man accused of possessing 21 kg charas on almost the same grounds. 

Furthermore, last month, in a case where a truck loaded with 628.28 Kg Ganja was apprehended but it was found that the accused/bail applicant was not named in the FIR nor was he present on spot, the Allahabad High court granted bail placing reliance upon Supreme Court's ruling in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2013).

Court had noted that no recovery was made from the possession of the accused and his name came into light on the confessional statements of co-accused. 

In Tofan Singh, it was held that "a confessional statement made before an officer designated under Section 42 or Section 53 can be the basis to convict a person under the NDPS Act, without any non obstante clause doing away with Section 25 of the Evidence Act, and without any safeguards, would be a direct infringement of the constitutional guarantees contained in Articles 14, 20 (3) and 21 of the Constitution of India.''

Therefore, stating that the complicity of the applicant will have to be determined by the quality of evidence led during trial, the high court had granted the applicant bail. 

Cases of drug recovery and bail are not thin on the ground, almost on a daily basis Allahabad High Court deals with such matters. However, verdict on the grant of bail differs in each one depending upon the facts and circumstances of the matter. 

Case Title: Ravi Kumar v. State of UP