Justice Amit Mahajan, Delhi High Court
Being In Regular Touch With Co-Accused Not Sufficient To Establish Offence: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To NDPS Accused
|The Delhi High Court allowed Applications seeking regular bail in an FIR registered for the offences under Sections 22(C), 25, and 29 of the NDPS Act.
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to an accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), saying that being in regular touch with the co-accused is not sufficient to establish offence.
The Court was dealing with Applications seeking regular bail in an FIR registered for the offences under Sections 22(C), 25, and 29 of the NDPS Act.
A Single Bench of Justice Amit Mahajan held, “Merely because the applicants were in regular touch with the co-accused, the same is not sufficient to establish the offence against the applicants. … Whether the financial transactions between the applicants and accused persons and the WhatsApp chats were in regard to the contraband, can only be ascertained after the entire evidence is led.”
Advocate Aditya Aggarwal represented the Applicants while APP Richa Dhawan represented the Respondents.
Facts of the Case
It was alleged that in November 2024, on the basis of a secret information, a trap was laid by the police team and three accused persons namely Laxman, Ankit, and Pankaj were identified to be involved in the supply of contraband. Out of the three accused persons, two were apprehended by the police, however, one (Ankit) fled the spot. It was further alleged that a brown colour cardboard box containing 176 boxes of Alprazolam tablets manufactured by the company “Pure & Cure Healthcare Pvt Ltd.” where each box contained 1760 strips and each strip contained 60 tablets weighing 14.080 kg was recovered from the possession of accused Laxman. It was also alleged that another brown coloured cardboard box containing 187 boxes of Alprazolam tablets manufactured by the company “Mancare Laboratories Pvt. Ltd” where each box contained 1870 strips and each strip contained 50 tablets weighing 13.090 kg was recovered from the possession of the accused Pankaj.
During the course of investigation, both accused persons were arrested. During interrogation, they disclosed that they worked for Ankit who had a godown/medical shop where he stored illegal drugs. Resultantly, Ankit was also arrested who revealed that the recovered boxes were procured by him from one Tanishq. The accused Tanishq disclosed that he subsequently ordered the supply from Vinay (Applicant). Another accused Aditya disclosed that he sourced the tablets from Raj Kumar Aggarwal (Applicant). It was alleged that during the course of investigation, WhatsApp chats between Raj and Amit was found thereby revealing discussions related to various NRX-listed drugs including Alprazolam tablets. Being aggrieved, the Applicants-accused approached the High Court, seeking bail.
Reasoning
The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, said, “This Court does not deem it apposite to comment extensively on the merits of the case when the charges are yet to be framed, however, in the absence of any substantial corroboration lending credence to the disclosure statements, the applicants have been able to establish a prima facie case for grant of bail.”
The Court noted that the Applicants have clean antecedents and that the embargo of Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not come in the way of granting bail to them.
“It is also relevant to note that the chargesheet has already been filed in the present case. Although the applicants were only arrested in January, 2025, however, it is pertinent to note that the matter is still at the stage of arguments on charge. In such circumstances, the trial is likely going to take long to conclude”, it added.
The Court further emphasised that the object of jail is to secure the appearance of the accused during the trial and the object is neither punitive nor preventive and the deprivation of liberty has been considered as a punishment.
“Even otherwise, any apprehension that the applicants will indulge in similar offences or evade trial can be taken care of by putting appropriate conditions”, it also said.
The Court, therefore, directed that the Applicants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount respectively, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
“In the event of there being any FIR/DD entry/complaint lodged against the applicants, it would be open to the respondent to seek redressal by filing an application seeking cancellation of bail”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Applications and granted bail to the accused persons.
Cause Title- Vinay Dua v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:4955)
Appearance:
Applicants: Advocates Aditya Aggarwal, Shivani Sharma, Vimal Kumar, and Abhinav Rai.
Respondents: APP Richa Dhawan