High Court Kerala High Court

P.Abdul Khader vs State Of Kerala on 23 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
P.Abdul Khader vs State Of Kerala on 23 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4392 of 2008()


1. P.ABDUL KHADER, S/O.UMMER, PAIKADAM
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :23/07/2008

 O R D E R
                            K.HEMA, J.
                 --------------------------------------
                  Bail Application No.4392 of 2008
                 ---------------------------------------
                Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2008


                               O R D E R

This petition is for bail.

2. The alleged offence is under Section 18(b) of NDPS

Act. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was found in

possession of 6 kg. of opium. He was arrested and he is in

custody from 2.3.2008 onwards for the past 142 days.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent and his daughter’s marriage is

fixed on 27.7.2008. The earlier application for bail was dismissed,

since the learned public prosecutor submitted that source of the

article as well as the retailers who are engaged in sale of opium

have to be found out and this will take sometime. Sufficient time

has elapsed after passing of the order on 29.5.2008 in

B.A.No.3283/08 but, even now nothing was traced out, it is

submitted. Therefore, there is no bonafides in insisting for

further detention. Learned counsel for the petitioner also

submitted that until the report of the chemical analysis comes, it

cannot be said that the article seized is opium, since the required

BA No.4392/08 2

percentage of morphine can be detected only by chemical

analysis.

4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor

submitted that the Investigating Officer have sufficient time to

investigate and statutory period is six months, under Section 167

(2) Crl.P.C. read with Section 36(A) (iv) of NDPS Act. The

investigation is going on to detect the source. The officials

themselves can identify the nature of the article involved though

it has to be confirmed by the chemical analysis. But, that cannot

be made a ground to allow the prayer.

5. On hearing both sides, I find that it will not be proper

to grant bail at this stage of investigation, since it may interfere

with an effective investigation.

6. However, it is made clear that the jail authorities shall

make arrangements without fail, to enable petitioner to

participate in the marriage ceremony of his daughter.

With these observations, this petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE
csl