The Kerala High Court has overturned the decision to cancel the bail of a person accused in a drug case, stating that the prosecution failed to prove any connection between the accused’s alleged involvement in a later crime and the current case.
The Kerala High Court overturned a decision by the Sessions Judge that canceled the bail of a man charged under the NDPS Act. The court noted that the prosecution failed to provide evidence linking the accused’s alleged involvement in a new crime to the previous case. This review was focused on an appeal against the Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-II) in Thiruvananthapuram. The accused is facing charges under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Justice K. Babu, in a Single-Judge Bench, emphasized that the principle of granting bail is favored, as stated in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Advocate Gokul D. Sudhakaran represented the accused, while PP G. Sudheer represented the prosecution. The case details revealed that the accused was found with 2.045 Kgs of Ganja. Initially, the Sessions Court granted him bail with specific conditions. Later, he faced new charges under various sections of the IPC but was also granted bail in that case. The Investigating Officer from the first case requested the Additional Sessions Court-II to cancel his bail, claiming he violated one of the bail conditions. The Sessions Judge agreed and canceled the bail, which is now being contested in this revision petition.
The petitioner argued that the conditions set by the Sessions Judge when granting bail were not applicable while he was involved in another crime. In contrast, the Public Prosecutor claimed that the conditions from the previous bail remained in effect even after the final report was submitted. It was noted that the petitioner had been granted bail by the Sessions Court during the investigation phase, with conditions aimed at ensuring the trial proceeded smoothly. The Investigating Agency completed its investigation and filed the final report, and there was no evidence that the petitioner interfered with the investigation. A year after the final report, the police recorded another crime, but the prosecution did not provide any evidence linking the petitioner’s alleged involvement in this new crime to the earlier trial or its proceedings.
The Bench pointed out that there was no indication that the petitioner intended to disrupt the justice process regarding the first case. It criticized the Sessions Judge for hastily canceling the bail without considering the merits of the new allegations. The Bench emphasized that the Sessions Judge failed to uphold the important responsibility of protecting an individual’s liberty. They observed that the order to cancel bail effectively acted as preventive detention. The Sessions Judge had not intended for the condition against committing any new offenses to apply throughout the trial. The Bench concluded that the order in question should be overturned.
The decision by the Additional Sessions Court-II in Thiruvananthapuram to cancel the accused’s bail was overturned, and the Criminal Revision Petition was approved.
Cause Title: Visakh v. State of Kerala [Neutral Citation- 2024:KER:80213]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Gokul D. Sudhakaran
Respondent: PP G. Sudheer
