Interim Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail application no. IA-01/2024
SC no. 362/2024
State vs. Kamran @ Monu
FIR No. 243/2023
PS Crime Branch
U/s. 21/25/29 NDPS Act
22.04.2024
Present : Sh. Sikhar Mahajan, Ld. Substitute Addl. PP for the
State.
Sh. Sachin Dev, Amicus Curiae for applicant/
accused Kamran @ Monu.
IO Inspector Jasbir Singh is present.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf
of accused Kamran @ Monu stating that accused has been falsely
implicated in the present case on the basis of disclosure statement
of co-accused persons namely Jai Kumar and Tushar Kumar.
Nothing has been recovered from his possession. It is stated that
as per the chart filed by the IO alongwith chargesheet, accused
has no direct connectivity with co-accused Jay Kumar and Tushar
Kumar and accused is shown to be connected with one Shiv
Kumar, who has been kept in column no. 12 and has not been
forwarded for trial. Hence, it is prayed that accused be released
on bail.
Reply has been filed on behalf of IO stating that on
the secret information received from the secret informer on
13.10.2023, two persons namely Jay Kumar and Tushar Kmar
were arrested and total 750 grams of Heroin was recovered from
them. On the basis of disclosure statement of accused Jay Kumar
and Tushar Kumar, accused Kamran @ Monu was arrested as he
is the supplier of the drugs to the accused persons.
Ld. Substitute Addl. PP has argued that commercial
quantity of heroin has been recovered from the co-accused
Page no. 1 of 4
-- 1 of 4 --
persons. However, he admits that as per the chart filed by the IO,
accused has no direct connectivity with co-accused persons Jai
Kumar and Tushar Kumar and has been shown to be connected
with one Shiv Kumar, who has not been forwarded for trial and
has been kept in column no.12.
Perusal of chargesheet reveals that except the
disclosure statement of co-accused persons, there is no material
on record to connect the accused with the alleged recovered
contraband recovered from the co-accused persons Jai Kumar
and Tushar Kumar.
In Phundreimayum Yas Khan v. State (NCT of
Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 135, the Hon’ble High Court
has observed as under:
23. In the present case, there are no monetary transactions,
bank statement or finances which shows the sale/purchase of
prohibited narcotic substance or psychotropic substance
between the applicant, Sayed Javed Hussain and/or Amarjit
Singh Sandhu. Except the statement of Sayed Javed Hussain
who stated that he used to purchase contraband in Delhi
through the applicant, there is nothing which shows the sale
and purchase of prohibited narcotic substance or psychotropic
substance between the applicant, Sayed Javed Hussain and
Amarjit Singh Sandhu.
Existence of any conspiracy between the applicant and
Sayed Javed Hussain based on the CDRs
a. It is stated by learned counsel for the Respondent that
the call record details show that the applicant was in
frequent contact with one Amarjit Singh Sandhu on
26.01.2021, i.e, the date when the Tramadol tablets
were collected by the co-accused Sayed Javed Hussain.
He further states that according to the CAF/CDR
details, location of the co-accused Sayed Javed
Hussain and the applicant is also found to be in Rajouri
Garden on 26.01.2021.
b. In my view, in the absence of any financial dealings, any
recovery of narcotic substance or psychotropic
substance from the applicant or from the premises of
the applicant and/or at the behest of the applicant, the
fact that the CAF/CDR details show calls between the
applicant and Amarjit Singh Sandhu and the applicant
and Sayed Javed Hussain, cannot be a ground to deny
Page no. 2 of 4
-- 2 of 4 --
him the bail in the present matter.
c. It is for the prosecution to establish the guilt, abetment,
conspiracy of the applicant beyond a reasonable doubt
which is not borne out from the CAF/CDR details.
Applicability of the rigours of section 37 of NDPS Act
a. In the present case, there is no recovery of commercial
quantity from the applicant, at the applicant's behest or
from the applicant's premises. This court in “Shravan
Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi” in Bail Application
No. 175/2018 has held that:—
“Undisputedly, the case of the prosecution qua
the petitioner is based upon circumstantial
evidence. No recovery of any contraband was
affected from the petitioner. Allegations against
him are that he conspired with co-accuses persons
for committing the aforesaid offences. The
petitioner was arrested after about twenty days of
the arrest of the co-accused Jagdish on 05.09.2017.
The prosecution has placed reliance only on call
detail record between the petitioner and co-accused
Saroj Subudhi. It is alleged that accused sent
Mobile No. 8860594548 or the accused Jagdish to
co-accused Saroj from Mobile No. 9650310668
through SMS, This circumstance alone at this stage
is not enough to deny bail to the petitioner despite
bar under section 37 of the NDPS Act.”
b. In the present case there is no recovery from the
applicant, Amarjit Singh Sandhu has not been arrested,
nothing has been recovered at the instance of the applicant
and there is no material to the link the applicant with the
recovery of the commercial quantity from Sayed Javed
Hussain, except Sayed Javed Hussain's own statement. In
this view of the matter, the rigours of section 37of
the NDPS Act do not apply to the applicant.
Considering the facts that no contraband has been
recovered from the accused/applicant and except for the
disclosure statement of the co-accused, there is no material on
record to connect the accused/applicant with the co-accused
persons. Accordingly, applicant/ accused Kamran @ Monu is
admitted to bail on furnishing of PB & SB in sum of Rs. 5,000/-
each. The accused is directed to inform the IO regarding his
mobile phone number and address as well as any change in the
same. The accused shall not contact, influence or coerce any
Page no. 3 of 4
-- 3 of 4 --
witness/person connected with the present case.
Bail application stands disposed off.
Copy of this order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for
applicant/ accused.
(ALOK SHUKLA)
ASJ-2/Special Judge (NDPS)
East/KKD/Delhi/22.04.2024
Page no. 4 of 4
-- 4 of 4 --