IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 7193 of 2009()
1. CHANDRAN, S/O. RAMU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
... Respondent
2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC
For Petitioner :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :08/12/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
B.A. NO. 7193 OF 2009
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2009
O R D E R
This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the second accused in
S.C.No.18 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge
(NDPS Act cases), Vadakara.
2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section
20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
3. The allegation is that the petitioner was found in
possession of 2 kgs of ganja. On 12.5.2009, bail was granted to the
petitioner. One of the conditions for granting bail was that the
petitioner shall not commit similar offence while on bail.
4. The Prosecutor filed an application for cancellation of bail
alleging that on 15.6.2009, the petitioner was found in possession of
225 gms of ganja and he was arrested by the Medical College Police
in Crime No.367 of 2009 for that offence. It was contended that the
petitioner having violated one of the conditions on which bail was
B.A. NO. 7193 OF 2009
:: 2 ::
granted, the bail was liable to be cancelled. The court below
cancelled the bail by the order dated 7.7.2009. Warrant was issued
against the petitioner. He was arrested on 12.11.2009 and he was
remanded to judicial custody. The petitioner filed Crl.M.C.No.2987
of 2009 challenging the order dated 7.7.2009 cancelling bail. The
Criminal Miscellaneous Case was dismissed by this Court as per the
order dated 19.10.2009.
5. The petitioner moved an application for bail before the
Special Judge (NDPS Act cases), which was dismissed by the order
dated 19.11.2009.
6. It is alleged that the petitioner violated the conditions
imposed while granting bail. The court below was satisfied that the
petitioner had violated one of the conditions on which bail was
granted. That order was confirmed by the High Court in
Crl.M.C.No.2987 of 2009. Therefore, the question whether the
petitioner had violated the condition while granting bail cannot be
gone into afresh. Now the question is whether the discretion should
be exercised to grant bail to the petitioner under Section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
B.A. NO. 7193 OF 2009
:: 3 ::
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think
that the petitioner is entitled to such discretionary relief. The
petitioner was granted bail with a specific condition that he should
not involve himself in similar criminal activities. He violated that
condition and he had dealt with ganja again. Dealing with ganja is a
very serious crime. It affects hundreds of persons. It is not a case
where one or two persons are affected by the offence committed by
the accused persons. A large number of persons being the victims
of offence, I do not think that a light approach should be made while
exercising the discretion under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner. The Bail Application is accordingly
dismissed. The trial court shall make every endeavour to expedite
the trial.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/