Sri Balaji C vs. State Of Karnataka

Facts

This case involves a criminal petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) seeking regular bail for the petitioner, Sri Balaji C. The petitioner was arrested in connection with Crime No. 20/2021 registered at Kumaraswamy Layout Police Station, Bengaluru City, for offences under Sections 22(c) and 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The prosecution alleges that on January 18, 2021, accused No. 1 was apprehended with 334 LSD strips and cash, valued at approximately Rs. 7 lakhs. Subsequently, on January 19, 2021, Rs. 27,50,000/- was recovered at the instance of the petitioner. The prosecution further claims that on the following day, 9310 LSD strips, worth Rs. 1 Crore, were seized from the room of accused No. 1, with the petitioner present, based on the voluntary statement of accused No. 1. The charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner, alleging joint involvement in trafficking LSD strips.

Held

The Court allowed the petition and granted bail to the petitioner. The Court noted that while the prosecution claimed a joint recovery was made at the instance of the petitioner and accused No. 1, the Property Form (P.F.) at page 54 indicated the recovery was made at the instance of accused No. 1, and the seized items were in the room of accused No. 1, not in the conscious possession of the petitioner. The primary material relied upon by the prosecution was the voluntary statement of accused No. 1. Although Rs. 27,50,000/- was recovered at the petitioner's instance, the petitioner claimed to be a gold merchant and produced a GST certificate. The Court found that continuing the petitioner in custody for over 1.5 years without any other corroborating material amounted to pre-conviction detention. Therefore, exercising discretion in favour of the petitioner was deemed appropriate, subject to conditions. The conditions included executing a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties, not tampering with witnesses, appearing on all future hearing dates, and not leaving the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior permission.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. given the allegations of recovery and his alleged involvement in the trafficking of LSD strips under Sections 22(c) and 27(a) of the NDPS Act? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contends that no recovery was made at his instance and that he is a gold merchant, supported by a GST certificate. He claims to be falsely implicated based solely on the voluntary statement of accused No. 1. The petitioner has been in custody for over 1.5 years and has no criminal antecedents, making him eligible for bail. Respondent's (State) arguments: The State argues that Rs. 27,50,000/- was seized at the petitioner's instance. They also assert that 9310 LSD strips were seized from the house of accused No. 1 while the petitioner was present, and that the petitioner used to supply LSD strips and operated across the country. The State acknowledges a potential omission in the charge-sheet regarding the seizure of these LSD strips but maintains a prima facie case against the petitioner.