SURJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused in Special Case (NDPS) No.220/2020 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bidar has approached this Court under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short 'Cr.PC.') seeking grant of regular bail.

(2.) Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this petition are as under:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused Sri R.S.Lagali vehemently contended that the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him and he was only a driver of the lorry in question and therefore sought for grant of bail. He further contended that absolutely there is no material either in the contents of mahazar or in the statements of the persons who have participated in the raid that petitioner was in conscious possession of the seized opium bags. He also contended that materials available on record does not establish direct or indirect nexus with the seized article insofar as the accused/petitioner is concerned and thus sought for grant of bail. He also contended that there is no compliance of Section 50 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'NDPS Act' for short) and therefore, the entire raid proceedings stood vitiated as is enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of judgments and thus sought for grant of bail. He also contended that the petitioner being the resident of Atwan village, Amb taluk in Una district of Himachal Pradesh was no way connected with the contraband materials alleged to have been seized by the excise police and thus a false case has been foisted by the police for statistic purpose and thus sought for grant of bail. He also contended that charge sheet having been filed, the main apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioner may not cooperate with the investigation and would tamper the prosecution evidence is now not available for the prosecution and thus sought for grant of bail.