news details |
|
|
| Court releases NDPS accused on bail | | | Jammu, Aug 12 :
Two persons, including an army jawan, from which opium weighing about 1.8 Kgs was allegedly recovered by the police, have been granted bail by the court of Second Additional Sessions Judge Jammu AK Koul.
In its order the court, however, directed the accused, Suram Singh son of Shiv Singh and Sodagar Das son of Ram Chand, to furnish two solvent sureties each in the amount of Rs.50, 000 with a personal recognizance in the like amount. The accused were also asked not to influence or overawe the witnesses in any manner, not to leave the jurisdiction of court and to attend the trial regularly without fail.
The accused, who have been book in case FIR 107/06 U/S 8/22/17B of NDPS Act, had move any application before the court seeking bail pending trial,. It was contended on behalf of petitioners/accused that they are innocent but have been booked in a false case. State resisted the petition on the ground that petitioners are involved in serious crime and so in view of the rigour contained in Sec.37 of NDPS Act, they cannot be given the concession of bail as in terms of said section refusal of bail is a rule and its grant an exception.
After hearing both the sides and going through the Case Diary (CD) file observed that petitioners were alleged to have been found to be in unaccounted possession of one kg and 800 gms of Opium, respectively as such the contraband recovered from petitioners is neither small nor a commercial quantity, but is in between two.
The question so is, whether section 37 of NDPS ACT would apply with full vigour to the instant case or not will actually decide the fate of this bail application, the court observed adding, the language of section 37 is clear in the sense that rigour contained in said section applies to situations where the offences u/s 19, 24 or 27-A or offences involving commercial quantity, are committed.
The order further reads that all other situations certainly are out of the purview of section 37. “There are catena of cases wherein my view stands fortified”, the court said before citing several High Court judgments on the point.
In the case at hand, its observed further, the contraband recovered from petitioners is less than commercial quantity but more than small quantity and so as already said the rigour contained in section 37 of NDPS Act, would certainly not apply to the instant case. As a corollary it follows that the bail matter has to be dealt with under the general law laid down in Cr.P.C.
The petitioners are in custody since more than 15 days now, and there is nothing on record to suggest that if released on bail, they would misuse this concession in any manner, the order said adding, they will have to face prosecution for the acts attributed to them, but their detention may not serve any useful purpose and rather it would amount to punishing them unheard.
“The purpose of bail is that accused must be available at trial so that rigour of penal law is emasculated. But we have nothing on record to suggest that petitioners would flee justice. So, there is no justifiable reason to decline bail to the petitioners. The facts suggest that a case for bail is made out in favour of petitioners”, the order reads further. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
