Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on May 30, 2023 dismissed bail application of an accused charged with offences under the NDPS Act, 1985 stating that the gravity of the offence is one of the determinative factor while deciding a bail application. Magnitude and extent of illicit drug trade and its impact on the lives of the consumers, cumulatively, guide the Court in assessing severity of the offence, Court said.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while rejecting the bail application under section 482 CrPC, observed, “The quantity recovered from the present accused/applicant is commercial in nature. Though the Court has to be conscious of the right of the accused to speedy trial and personal liberty, when the same is weighed in the weighing scale of the offence he is alleged to have committed and its larger repercussions on younger generation, their families and their future, the offence committed by him against which there is a strong suspicion has to give way to his right of personal liberty. Right to personal liberty is subject to restrictions by the State in case of criminal offences for the larger good of the public and their safety. With four kgs of heroin in his possession and the number of people he was supplying it to can also be gauged from the fact that he has made 238 calls to the co-accused persons and some other person regarding such transactions. The target groups of the drug supply are younger generation.”

The accused was charged with offences under Ss. 21/61/85/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

Counsel for the applicant submitted that he had been in judicial custody for more than four years and the trial had not proceeded. Further, the discrepancy in sampling indicated that the applicant had been implicated on false grounds and that the seizure of the quantity had not been done as per law.

On the contrary, counsel for the State argued that 2 kg heroin was effected from the applicant himself and the remaining from the car used in the commission of the offence, which undisputedly belonged to him. This itself proves a prima facie case against the applicant, the counsel argued.

“… this Court is of the opinion that in this case, there are multiple prima facie evidences which point out towards involvement of the accused in the offence in question. It is clear from the record that the accused was apprehended at the spot itself which is not disputed by the learned counsel for the applicant… It is also a matter of record that two kg of heroin was not only recovered from the accused/applicant at the spot but further two kg of heroin was recovered at his instance from the car which is owned by him and registered in his name. There is report of FSL which supports the claim of the prosecution that substance recovered from the accused/applicant was psychotropic substance called heroin. Further, the voice samples of the accused persons were obtained and were sent for matching with their voice samples and the report confirms that it is the voice sample of the accused/applicant”, Court further added.

On 13.03.2019 at about 5:30 am, information was received that one Amit indulging in drug trafficking on direction of Mukesh and Ankush (the applicant in the present case), had brought a consignment of heroin from Bareilly, UP from one Sajid.

Amit and Ankush had gone near Ram Murti Marg, near Rohini to deliver a consignment of heroin.

A raiding party led by SI Ravi Kumar and other members of the team were constituted to trap the accused near Veer Apartment, Rohini. Applicants were apprehended at about 7:15 am on 13.03.2019.

On a preliminary search, two kg of heroin was recovered from the bag carried by Ankush and an additional two kg was recovered from the car owned by him.

Case Title: Ankush v. GNCTD of Delhi | BAIL APPLN. 1263 of 2022