KEITH EMMANUEL ARNOLD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10/5/2024 in C.C.No.556 of 2024 on the file of the learned I Additional Special Judge for NDPS Act, Chennai, for the offences under Ss. 8(c) r/w 22(c), 23(c), 28 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, seeks bail. The earlier bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court, vide order dtd. 2/4/2025 in Crl.O.P.No.2266 of 2025.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 26/10/2023 based on a specific information, the respondent police team went to the place of occurrence and intercepted A1: that after complying all the mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act, search and seizure was effected and found that A1 was in illegal possession of 2.36 grams of LSD blots and 129 grams of MDMA pills; that thereafter, summons under Sec. 67 of NDPS Act was issued to A1 and his statement was recorded, which reveals that A1 acted as a peddler for the petitioner herein (A2), who procured narcotic drugs through dark net platforms using cryptocurrency and arranged international courier deliveries under fake identities; that thereafter, the petitioner was summoned by the Investigation Officer, since the petitioner evaded the investigation process, a complaint was initially filed against A1 and the investigation against the petitioner herein was kept open; that subsequent to filing of complaint against A1, a summon was issued to the petitioner herein on 8/5/2024 and his statement was recorded under Sec. 67 of the NDPS Act; that during further course of investigation, including confessional statements, digital material and other evidences, establish the active and long-standing role of the petitioner herein in procurement, trafficking, financing and conspiracy; that subsequently, the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, only based on the confession of A1; that there is no recovery effected from the petitioner herein and the respondent had not included the name of the petitioner herein in the charge sheet filed on 16/4/2024 against A1 and nor shown as an absconding accused; that there is no legally acceptable evidence produced by the prosecution to link the petitioner herein with A1 and the alleged contraband seized in this case; that the earlier bail application of the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.2266 of 2025 was dismissed by this Court, vide order dtd. 2/4/2025 with a direction to the Trial Court to complete the trial within a period of four months, however the trial has not yet concluded; that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 10/5/2024; and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and sought for bail to the petitioner.