(1.) The present petitioner has filed this petition under section 438 of Cr.P.C., 1973 seeking his enlargement on anticipatory bail in respondent/complainant police station crime No.82/2017 for the offence under Section 20 (B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'NDPS Act' for short).
(2.) The summary of the case of the complainant is that the Police Inspector CCB, Special Police Station, Belagavi got credible information at 08:00 hours on 05.04.2017 about the alleged transportation of narcotic drugs by two accused near Gandhi Nagar coming within the jurisdiction of Malmaruti Police Station. The said Police Officer after complying the provisions of NDPS Act, gathered his staff and panchas and taking necessary materials required for the purpose of raid and seizure of the article he proceeded along with the team to the place revealed to him under the information. While watching under a shadow, the team noticed two persons standing near a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-22/EM-9801 along with plastic bag. By their movements getting suspension, the raiding team surrounded them and the complainant - Police Inspector subjected those two persons to enquiry. After getting non satisfactory reply by them, he conducted a search in the presence of Gazetted Officer who was accompanying them and noticed that both those suspected persons were found in possession of Cannabis (Ganja) of totally weighing about 22 Kg 500 grams. The complainant Police Officer draw a seizure panchanama on the spot, seized the article, apprehended those two persons and after returning to his office, lodged a complaint with the complainant police which was registered against those two persons for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act. It is also the content of the complaint that, during the enquiry of those two apprehended accused on the spot, it was revealed by them that they were supplied with the alleged goods by one Sri Siddappa Bhajantri of Kulhalli village who is the present petitioner herein.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner in his argument submitted that, the alleged offence is said to have taken place on 05.04.2017 and the alleged goods is also said to have been recovered from accused No.1 and 2. Those two accused have already been enlarged on regular bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C., 1973 The alleged involvement of the present petitioner is only based upon the alleged disclosure said to have been made by the accused No.1 and 2. As such, there is no prima facie material to suspect the involvement of the present petitioner in the crime. He further submitted that, since the investigation is completed there is no necessity for the complainant-police to apprehend the present petitioner. He further submits that, the petitioner would abide by all the conditions imposed by this Court.