NIRANJAN R. SHIVANGI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for grant of bail by the petitioners, who are involved in offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

(2.) IN the nutshell, it is alleged that the officers from the Crime Branch, Solapur City, raided the premises of Vijayanand Road Transport company, at Solapur, on the information that some narcotic substance such as Poppy Straws are being transported. Accordingly, the party arrived at the premises of Vijaynand Road Transport Company along with panchas and raided the place. There were 10 bags of Poppy Straws in the premises. While raid was going on, one person with hand-cart arrived in front of the premises. On search, it was found that the hand-cart contained 5 bags of Poppy Straws. On suspicion, these bags were checked. On the gunny bags the substance "Dhond-phool" was inscribed in ink meaning thereby contents of the said bags are "Dhond-phool". When the cart-man was accosted he disclosed that bags were entrusted to him by a firm of Sangam Traders, of which the petitioners are partners. Thereafter the party proceeded to the godown and place of business of the petitioners and conducted search. It was found that the petitioners firm was granted licence to deal in Poppy Straws. But registers and documents required to be maintained under the Rules were not properly maintained. One voucher for 5 bags of "Dhondphool" being transported to Hubli was also found in the document. It is alleged that this voucher relates to five bags of Poppy Straws attached from the hand-cart in front of the premises of Vijayanand Road Transport Company. On these facts, petitioners came to be arrested, and thereafter the petitioners applied for bail to the special Judge for Sessions Court, Solapur, which came to be rejected on 12th February 1996. That is how, petitioners have approached this Court.

(3.) HAVING considered the material on record and the submissions advanced on behalf of both the sides. It is evident that at present the only circumstances against the petitioners is the statement made by Coolie Kadam to the effect that he got those 5 bags of Poppy Straws from the offices of Sangam Traders, the firm of the petitioners. I am quite aware that under section 37 of the NDPS Act, the Court has to record a finding that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit offence while on bail. It is to be noted that this case is not of usual type where some Narcotic drug like Heroin etc. is found. It is an admitted position that the firm of the petitioners holds a licence to deal in Poppy Straws. Under the circumstances, possession, warehousing etc. of Poppy Straws is not said to be an offence in the present case. The only allegation against the petitioners are that they wanted to export those Poppy Straws bags to Hubli to one trader and for that purpose they did not obtain necessary licence from the concerned department. That is how, offence under Sections 15 of the NDPC Act is alleged to be committed. Though the learned Public Prosecutor Vehemently argued that the Voucher found in the shop of the petitioners mentioned 5 bags of "Dhondphool" and the same term is inscribed on the 5 bags of Poppy Straws found at the premises of Vijanand Transport, yet, voucher itself does not bear any printed firm name or rubber stamp of the firm of the petitioner. The fact that this voucher is found in the office of the petitioners-firm is not way connecting factor to the Poppy Straws bags found in front of the Transport Company of Vijayanand Transport. Further, the term "Dhondphool" is mentioned in the voucher and no connection has been established, so as to connect the firm of the petitioners. Thus, the only circumstances, viz. statements of Kadam-K Coolie, who himself, is found in possession of Poppy Straws is rather risky to be relied upon if and that is excluded from consideration, there remains nothing to connect the petitioners. As such, there are no reasonable grounds for holding the petitioners to be guilty of the alleged offence. As stated earlier, the petitioners are having licence to deal in Poppy Straws. If at all they wanted to export, they should have done so by obtaining necessary licence, Further more, goods were just brought in front of the premises of Vijayanand Transport and there was no move of loading them in the truck for Hubli. I am, therefore, of the opinion that it cannot be said that there are sufficient grounds for holding the petitioners guilty or that they would commit such offence if released on bail. As such, I find that this is a fit case where petitioners should be released on bail.