Bookmark
PDF
Share
CaseIQ

ANJALI v. STATE (GNCT DELHI)

Delhi High Court

Sep 6, 2023

Judgment

CaseIQ

Smart Summary (Beta)

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner, Anjali, was apprehended on 15.05.2023 at around 1:20 P.M. outside her residence at House no. B-137, Amar Jyoti Colony, Shahbad, Daulatpur, Delhi, based on secret information received by HC Vinod Kumar. She was found in possession of 2.700 kilograms of ganja, an intermediate quantity under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The secret information was recorded in compliance with section 42 of the NDPS Act, and a raiding party was formed and deployed. Despite requests, public persons refused to join the raid. The petitioner was given notice under section 50 of the NDPS Act at the time of apprehension. She has been in judicial custody since 15.05.2023. A charge-sheet has been filed following the conclusion of the investigation. The petitioner filed a bail application before the Sessions Court, which was dismissed on 18.07.2023 by the Special Judge (NDPS), North, Rohini Courts, Delhi. This bail application under section 439 Cr.P.C. is now before the High Court of Delhi.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the petitioner, found in possession of an intermediate quantity of ganja (2.700 kg), is entitled to regular bail under the NDPS Act, considering the rigour of section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Whether the principles established in prior decisions relating to intermediate quantity and bail under the NDPS Act apply to the petitioner’s case.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 15.05.2023 and the investigation has concluded with the filing of the charge-sheet.
The contraband (ganja) was allegedly planted on the petitioner.
The quantity of ganja recovered (2.700 kg) is an intermediate quantity, which is more than small quantity but less than commercial quantity.
The rigour of section 37 of the NDPS Act, which imposes stringent conditions on bail, is not applicable to cases involving intermediate quantity.
Cited the order dated 20.07.2022 in Bail Application no. 1538/2022 (Anita v State (NCT of Delhi)) to support the claim that bail should be granted in cases involving intermediate quantity.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Additional Public Prosecutor argued that the petitioner is not entitled to bail given the facts and circumstances of the case.
Cited the Supreme Court judgment dated 24.01.2020 in Criminal Appeal Nos.154-157/2020 (State of Kerala v Rajesh) to oppose the grant of bail.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Anita v State (NCT of Delhi), Bail Application no. 1538/2022	Intermediate quantity of contraband does not attract rigour of section 37 NDPS Act; bail can be granted.	Supported the petitioner’s argument that bail is permissible in cases involving intermediate quantity.
State of Kerala v Rajesh, Criminal Appeal Nos.154-157/2020 (Supreme Court)	General principle on bail under NDPS Act, emphasizing strict approach.	Cited by the respondent to argue against bail.
Sunil v The State of NCT of Delhi, Bail Application no. 495/2022	Bail allowed for intermediate quantity cases without assessing merits of trial.	Reinforced the principle that bail can be granted for intermediate quantity possession.
Rehmatullah @ Arman v State of Delhi, Bail Application no. 2866/2022	Intermediate quantity cases are exempt from rigour of section 37 NDPS Act; bail permissible.	Confirmed bail eligibility in intermediate quantity cases.
Narsimman v State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), Bail Application no. 3863/2022	Intermediate quantity of ganja does not attract rigour of section 37 NDPS Act; bail granted.	Applied to support bail grant in current case involving intermediate quantity.
Gajender Bahadur v The State Govt of NCT of Delhi, Bail Application no. 3655/2022	Trial and evidence required to adjudicate issues; bail granted for intermediate quantity after prolonged custody and charge-sheet filing.	Used to justify bail despite ongoing trial and prior cases; emphasized no custodial interrogation required.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court examined the facts that the petitioner was found in possession of 2.700 kg of ganja, which qualifies as an intermediate quantity under the NDPS Act. It noted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since the date of arrest and that the investigation is complete with the charge-sheet already filed. The court analyzed relevant precedents from Coordinate Benches of the High Court of Delhi which consistently hold that the rigour of section 37 of the NDPS Act does not apply to intermediate quantity cases. These precedents also reflect that bail may be granted in such cases subject to conditions, especially where there are no adverse antecedents and custodial interrogation is not necessary. The court balanced the petitioner’s custodial duration and the nature of the offence, concluding that bail is appropriate under these circumstances. The court imposed conditions to ensure the petitioner’s compliance with trial procedures and to prevent tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

Holding and Implications

The court allowed the bail application and admitted the petitioner to bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The bail is subject to conditions: the petitioner shall not leave the country, shall appear before the Trial Court as directed, keep her mobile phone operational, and refrain from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

The direct effect of this decision is the release of the petitioner on bail. The court did not establish any new precedent but applied established principles relating to intermediate quantity possession under the NDPS Act and bail jurisprudence. This decision thus aligns with prior rulings and provides relief in the specific factual context of the petitioner’s case.

Show all summary ...

BAIL APPLN. 2464/2023 Page 1

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Reserved on: September 04, 2023 Decided on: September 06, 2023

+ BAIL APPLN. 2442/2023 ANJALI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Suraj Prakash Sharma, Advocate.

STATE (GNCT DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State.

CORAM

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN

J U D G M E N T

1. The present bail application is filed on behalf of the petitioner/applicant under section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in FIR bearing no. 0518/2023 registered at P.S. Shahbad Dairy, Delhi under section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "NDPS Act").

2. The perusal of FIR bearing no.0518/2023 dated 15.05.2023 registered under section 20 of NDPS Act reflects that HC Vinod Kumar on receipt of secret information on 15.05.2023 at around

11:30 A.M., apprehended the petitioner/applicant Anjali, resident of House no. B-137, Amar Jyoti Colony, Shahbad, Daulatpur, Delhi, who was stated to be indulged in the supply of ganja in Delhi, when she came outside her house at around 01:20 P.M. to deliver ganja to someone. The secret information was reduced to writing for compliance of section 42 of NDPS Act and thereafter a raiding party was prepared on the direction of senior officers. The raiding party proceeded towards the informed place alongwith necessary equipments and the secret informer and reached there at around 01:10 P.M. Inspite of request, the public persons refused to join raiding party after citing their difficulties. At about 01:19 P.M., one woman came outside the informed place i.e. House no. B-137, Amar Jyoti Colony, Shahbad, Daulatpur, Delhi and was standing near the gate of the abovementioned house carrying an orange coloured plastic bag in her hand. She was identified by the informer as Anjali i.e. the petitioner/applicant. The raiding party apprehended her. Notice under section 50 of NDPS Act was also given to her. The petitioner/applicant was found in possession of 2.700 kilograms of ganja.

3. The petitioner/applicant filed a bail application before the Sessions Court bearing Bail Regn. no. 1675/2023 which was dismissed vide order dated 18.07.2023 passed by the court of Sh. Dhirendra Rana, ASJ/Special Judge (NDPS), North, Rohini Courts, Delhi.

4. The counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/applicant argued that the petitioner/applicant is in judicial custody since 15.05.2023 and after conclusion of investigation, the chargesheet has already been filed. He further argued that the contraband was planted on the petitioner/applicant and the quantity of ganja recovered from the petitioner/applicant is 2.700 kg which is an 'intermediate quantity' i.e. more than small quantity but less than commercial quantity. The counsel for the petitioner/applicant seeks the grant of regular bail to the petitioner/applicant on the ground that the rigour of section 37 of NDPS Act is not applicable in cases where the quantity of contraband recovered is an intermediate quantity. The counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/applicant cited the order dated 20.07.2022 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Bail Application no. 1538/2022 titled as Anita V State (NCT of Delhi)

wherein it was observed as under:-

5. In the present case, the recovery made from the applicant is 50 grams of Heroine from the cupboard of her house. The applicant has been in custody since 25.06.2021. xxx xxx xxx

7. Since only 50 grams of Heroine was recovered from the petitioner, the same comes within the „intermediate" quantity and the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not applicable to the facts of the present case.

8. The applicant is a permanent resident of Delhi, namely, H. No. E-1681-1682, JJ Colony, Bawana, Delhi-110039. xxx xxx xxx

10. For the aforesaid reasons, I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail…

5. The Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent/State argued that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner/applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. He cited the judgment dated 24.01.2020 passed by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.154-157/2020 [arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos.7309-7312/2019] titled as State of Kerala etc. V Rajesh etc.

6. The Coordinate Benches of this Court have considered the issue regarding grant of bail in cases of possession of intermediate quantity of contraband. In Sunil V The State of NCT of Delhi, Bail Application no. 495/2022 decided on 28.07.2022, it was observed as under:-

Without any observations on the merits or demerits of the trial that is in progress, taking into account the factum that the recovery from the applicant is stated to be only of 8 gms of heroin falling within the ambit of an intermediate quantity with no previous adverse antecedents against the applicant, the applicant is allowed to be released on bail…

6.1 In Rehmatullah @ Arman V State of Delhi, Bail Application no. 2866/2022 decided on 24.11.2022, it was observed as under:-

Taking into account the factum that the allegations against the petitioner relate to the alleged recovery of an intermediate quantity of Ganja, to which the parameters of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 are not applicable and there being no previous adverse antecedents against the applicant, the applicant is allowed to be released on bail…

6.2 In Narsimman V State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), Bail Application no.3863/2022 decided on 09.02.2023, it was observed as under:-

5. In the instant case, 1.730 kg „Gaanja" which was recovered from the petitioner is within the intermediate quantity, therefore, the rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act do not apply to the present case. Furthermore, all the witnesses are police officials.

6. Keeping in view the entire circumstances of the case and the fact that petitioner is in judicial custody since 25.09.2022, the petition is allowed. Accordingly, petitioner is admitted to bail…

6.3 In Gajender Bahadur V The State Govt of NCT of Delhi,

Bail Application no. 3655/2022 decided on 31.01.2023, it was observed as under:-

6. These are issues which can only be adjudicated after evidence. For the time being, the quantity alleged to be recovered from the applicant is at best 1170 grams of Ganja which is an intermediate quantity. The applicant has been in custody since 09.10.2020, charge-sheet already has been filed and no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. As regards the other two cases against the applicant under the NDPS Act are concerned, the applicant has already been granted bail by the competent Courts of jurisdiction. The trial is not likely to conclude in near future and the continued incarceration of the applicant will not serve any purpose.

7. For the aforesaid reasons, the applicant is directed to be released on bail in FIR No. 473/2020 dated 07.10 2020, under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, registered at Police Station- Shastri Park…

7. The petitioner/applicant is in judicial custody since 15.05.2023. The investigation has been concluded and the charge- sheet has already been filed. The petitioner/applicant was found in possession of 2.700 kg of ganja which is an intermediate quantity. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the petitioner/applicant Anjali is admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court with directions to the petitioner/applicant to the effect that:

i) she shall not leave the country under any circumstances;

ii) she shall appear before the learned Trial Court as and when directed by the learned Trial Court;

iii) she shall keep his mobile phone operational and reachable at all times;

iv) she shall not tamper with the evidence or try to influence or threaten the witness.

8. The present bail application along with pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.

DR. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN

(JUDGE)

SEPTEMBER 06, 2023