| HC denies bail to two NDPS accused, flags commercial quantity & repeat offending | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Nov 18: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu had rejected bail pleas in two separate narcotics cases, underscoring both the statutory bar on bail in commercial quantity cases and the need to protect society from habitual offenders involved in drug trafficking.
Justice Shahzad Azeem, while pronouncing reserved orders in Bail Application Nos. 240/2025 and 209/2025, declined bail to accused Fayaz Ahmad Sheikh and Mohd. Tahir respectively, though the two cases involved different quantities and legal thresholds under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
In the first case, the petitioner Fayaz Ahmad Sheikh is facing trial before the Principal Sessions Judge, Samba (Special Judge NDPS) in NCB Crime No. 16 of 2021 for offences under Sections 8/22/29 of the NDPS Act. According to the prosecution, acting on a secret information that Sheikh was transporting a large quantity of Tramadol-based capsules from New Delhi to Jammu, the Narcotics Control Bureau intercepted a bus at Sarore Toll Plaza, Samba on 26 November 2021. During the search, officials recovered 24 boxes of Spasmo Proxyvon Plus containing 3,456 Tramadol capsules weighing 1.33056 kg - a quantity falling in the "commercial" category. Rejecting bail, the Court noted that eight of the eleven witnesses had already been examined and found that the petitioner had not laid any factual foundation to satisfy the stringent twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Union of India vs. Vigin K. Varghese (2025), holding that procedural lapses alone cannot dilute the statutory restriction on bail where commercial quantity is involved.
In the second matter, the Court also refused bail to 35-year-old Mohd. Tahir of village Kote Behrote, Thanamandi, District Rajouri, who is facing trial before the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge NDPS cases), Rajouri in FIR No. 34/2025 registered under Sections 8/21/22 of the NDPS Act. He was allegedly apprehended by a police patrol on 16 March 2025 at Siyal Kassi Rajdhani bridge and found in possession of 6.30 grams of heroin along with one syringe containing 2 ml of heroin solution - an intermediate quantity. While the petitioner argued that Section 37 did not apply, the prosecution highlighted his alleged criminal history, including five earlier FIRs, three of which relate to NDPS offences, and his preventive detention under the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (PITNDPS) Act. Justice Shahzad Azeem held that even where Section 37 is not attracted, factors such as likelihood of repeating the offence, character and antecedents of the accused must guide the Court in deciding bail. Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Neeru Yadav vs. State of U.P., the Court said that personal liberty must be balanced with the larger interest of society, especially when prima facie there is a pattern of repeated offending. —(JNF) |
|
