SANTOSH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions are filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking regular bail in respect of Crime No.89/2021 for the offences punishable under Ss. 20(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'NDPS Act' for short), on the file of Prl.C.J. (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Aland, Gulbarga.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case in these two petitions are that based on the credible information on 19.06.2021 at about 14:00 hours that these persons are carrying gaanja subjected the vehicle for search and found gaanja in the said vehicle and on enquiry they have not given any details and also not produced any licence. On weighing the same, it was 58.970kg worth of Rs.5,89,700.00 and the vehicle-Scorpio in which they were transporting was also seized by drawing mahazar and registered the case.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both petitions would vehemently contend that before seizing the same, they have not obtained permission from the Court. He would further contend that the same is in violation of Ss. 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. He would further contend that under Sec. 50 of the Act it is mandatory on the part of the Investigating Officer to seize the same in the presence of gazetted officer. He would also submit that these petitioners have falsely implicated in the case and petitioners are no way concerned with transporting the gaanja. The learned counsel would also submit that in the panchanama it is mentioned that panchanama was conducted with the assistance of the laptop on the spot and thereafter they have taken the print. It clearly shows that the police have not at all conducted panchanama on the alleged date and place and very seizure itself is doubtful. Hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail by exercising powers under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C.