Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Kerala High Court Grants Bail to First-Time Offender Arrested with Ganja - Lengthy Custody and Delayed Trial.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment delivered on October 19, 2023, the High Court of Kerala granted bail to a first-time offender accused of violating the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The petitioner, identified as Satheesan, had been in custody since October 11, 2022, following allegations of transporting contraband.

The Court's decision hinged on several critical observations, notably the prolonged detention of the accused, the absence of criminal antecedents, and the delay in bringing the case to trial. The judgment cited these factors to justify granting bail to the petitioner.

In the judgment, Justice A. Badharudeen noted, "Epitomizing the parameters laid down by the Apex Court in the decisions herein above discussed, the following parameters clubbed together can be considered to dilute the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act: (1) the accused should not have any criminal antecedents. (2) the accused has been in custody for a long time, at least a period more than one year (say for eg. about fourteen months in the instant case). (3) the impossibility of trial within a reasonable time (for this purpose, the Court granting bail should ensure that trial could not be completed at least within a period of six months). Yet another aspect to be added in the list, in my view, is the quantity of the contraband. That is to say, when the quantity of contraband is something just above the intermediate quantity and the same is not a huge or sizable quantity, the same also can be considered after satisfying the above 3 parameters stated herein above, for diluting the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act."

Satheesan's counsel had argued that his client's detention had exceeded one year, and the trial had not progressed within six months. The petitioner had also raised concerns about the legality of the search conducted between sunset and sunrise, emphasizing the need for the prosecution to show compliance with the 2nd proviso to Section 42 of the NDPS Act.

In response to these arguments, the Court granted bail to Satheesan, imposing specific conditions, including a bond of Rs. 50,000 and two solvent sureties. The petitioner is also required to cooperate with the trial, not intimidate witnesses, and surrender his passport if applicable.

The judgment cited the ratio in Fasil v. State of Kerala [2023 (3) KHC 212], which was not disputed by the learned Public Prosecutor, as it aligned with the circumstances of this case. The decision underscores the importance of considering individual circumstances and the length of detention when evaluating bail applications, especially in NDPS cases.

Date of Decision: 19 October 2023

SATHEESAN  vs STATE OF KERALA   

Latest Legal News