Dowry Case | In the absence of specific allegations, mere naming of distant relatives cannot justify prosecution: MP High Court Non-Commencement of Activities Alone Not a Ground for Refusal: Calcutta High Court at Calcutta Affirms Trust Registration, Stating Granting Shifting Permissions is a Quasi-Judicial Act: Delhi High Court Quashes Disciplinary Charges Against MCA Official Jurisdiction Does Not Preclude Transfer to Competent Family Courts: Rules Kerala High Court Madras High Court Acquits Two, Reduces Sentence of Main Accused: Single Injury Does Not Prove Intent to Murder Financial Creditors Retain Right to Pursue Personal Guarantors Post-Resolution Plan: Punjab & Haryana High Court Proper Notice and Enquiry are the Bedrock of Just Administrative Actions: Rajasthan High Court Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Discharge Order in Madan Tamang Murder Case, Orders Trial for Bimal Gurung Review Cannot be Treated Like an Appeal in Disguise: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Tax Review Petition Delhi High Court Orders Interest Payment on Delayed Tax Refunds: ‘Refund Delays Cannot Be Justified by Legal Issues’” Freedom of Press Does Not Exempt Legal Consequences: Kerala High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Journalists in Jail Sting Operation Highest Bidder Has No Vested Right”: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Rejection of SEZ Plot Allotment Indefeasible Right to Bail Arises When Investigation Exceeds Statutory Period: Punjab & Haryana HC Sets Aside Extension Orders in NDPS Case Higher Qualifications Can't Override Prescribed Standards, But Service Deserves Pension: Punjab & Haryana High Court A Mere Breach of Promise Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust Under Section 406 IPC: Rajasthan High Court Madras High Court Overturns Order Denying IDA Increments, Citing Unfair Settlement Exclusion No Premeditated Intention to Kill: Kerala High Court Reduces Murder Convictions in Football Clash Case Landlord Need Not Be Owner to Seek Eviction: Court Upholds Broad Definition of Landlord under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 Delhi High Court Sets Aside Status Quo on Property, Initiates Contempt Proceedings for False Pleadings and Suppression of Facts Calcutta High Court Rules Deceased Driver Qualifies as Third Party, Overrides Policy Limitations for Just Compensation A Litigant Who Pollutes the Stream of Justice Is Not Entitled to Any Relief: Rajasthan High Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case Due to Suppression of Evidence Punjab and Haryana High Court Awards Compensation in Illegal Termination Case, Affirms Forest Department as an 'Industry' Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof: Madras High Court Acquits Man in Double Murder Case Kerala High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Loan Repayment Dispute: Manifestly Attended with Mala Fide Intentions Systematic Instruction Essential for ‘Education’ Tax Exemption: Delhi High Court Intent to Deceive Constitutes Forgery: High Court of Calcutta Dismisses Quashing Petition in Fraudulent Property Inclusion Case

Kerala High Court Denies Bail in Largest Heroin Seizure Case, Stresses Stringent NDPS Act Conditions

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Kerala High Court has denied bail to two accused in a high-profile heroin seizure case involving the largest recovery of the drug in the country. The court's decision, delivered by Justice A. Badharudeen, underscored the stringent requirements for bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, highlighting the significant risk of reoffending if the accused were released.

The case revolves around the seizure of 217.525 kg of heroin from two boats, "Little Jesus" and "Prince," intercepted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) on May 18, 2022. The boats, registered in Tamil Nadu, were found near Kochi, leading to the arrest of multiple individuals, including the petitioners, S. John Bosco and Sobhan S. The accused claimed they were merely fishermen unaware of the contraband on board, while the prosecution presented evidence suggesting their active involvement in the drug trafficking operation.

Justice A. Badharudeen noted that the prosecution had presented substantial evidence indicating the accused's involvement in the crime. "The presence of very few fishes in the boats, coupled with the seizure of such a large quantity of heroin, points to a clear involvement in the trafficking operation," the court observed. The defense's argument that the accused were innocent fishermen was not convincing given the circumstances and the evidence presented.

The court emphasized the stringent bail conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which requires the court to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offense and that they are unlikely to commit any offense while on bail. Justice Badharudeen stated, "In light of the substantial evidence against the accused and the seriousness of the charges, this court cannot satisfy the conditions necessary for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act."

The judgment extensively discussed the principles of granting bail under the NDPS Act, reiterating the Supreme Court's interpretation of "reasonable grounds" in such cases. The court highlighted that reasonable grounds must be more than prima facie and should suggest a substantial probability of the accused's innocence. "The materials available on record, including the seizure of a significant quantity of heroin and the role of the accused in transporting the contraband, fail to meet this threshold," the court concluded.

Justice Badharudeen remarked, "The sheer quantity of heroin seized and the specific circumstances of the case make it clear that the accused's release on bail would not be in the interest of justice. The conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act must be strictly adhered to, especially in cases involving such severe offenses."

The High Court's decision to deny bail reinforces the rigorous standards set under the NDPS Act for offenses involving large quantities of narcotics. By upholding these standards, the judgment aims to deter drug trafficking and ensure that those involved in such serious crimes are not granted leniency through bail. This ruling is expected to have a significant impact on future cases, emphasizing the judiciary's commitment to combating the narcotics trade.

 

Date of Decision: June 6, 2024

John Bosco and Others VS Union of India and Others

Similar News