Early Times Report
Jammu, May 9: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed the bail plea of an accused in a 400-gram heroin recovery case, holding that habitual offenders in commercial quantity NDPS matters deserve “zero leniency” as drug trafficking poses a grave threat to society and youth.
Justice Rajesh Sekhri rejected the bail application of Raj Wali, also known as Sher Ali alias Shadoo, resident of Makar Khad Jagtipur, Kathua, after observing that the accused failed to satisfy the strict twin conditions laid down under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
As per the prosecution, on April 14, 2023, a police party during routine patrolling near Tarnah Bridge intercepted a car bearing registration No. DL6CP-0821 on its way from Kathua to Jammu. On seeing the police party, three persons allegedly abandoned the vehicle and tried to flee. One person jumped from Tarnah Bridge and was found injured, while two others managed to escape.
Later, the police searched the abandoned vehicle in the presence of Executive Magistrate, Chadwal, and recovered 400 grams of heroin-like substance from the stereo of the car, along with two mobile phones. The contraband was seized and sent to FSL Jammu, which confirmed the presence of heroin.
The applicant contended that he had been implicated only on the basis of a disclosure statement of a co-accused, which was not admissible in law. However, the High Court termed the contention “factually incorrect and legally flawed”, noting that the prosecution case was that the applicant had fled from the spot and was later traced after it surfaced that he was lodged in Police Station Sadar, Pathankot, Punjab, in another NDPS case.
The Court further noted that one of the mobile phones recovered from the vehicle was subscribed in the name of the applicant’s wife and, as per the investigating agency, no satisfactory explanation was furnished in this regard.
Opposing the bail plea, Government Advocate Mr. Suneel Malhotra argued that the case involved commercial quantity and the statutory rigour of Section 37 NDPS Act was fully attracted. The applicant was represented by Mr. A. R. Khan and Amjed Khan, Advocates.
The High Court observed that in cases involving commercial quantity, especially where the accused has criminal antecedents, Section 37 creates a near absolute bar on bail unless the accused shows reasonable grounds that he is not guilty and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
Referring to the applicant’s alleged involvement in multiple cases, the Court held that habitual offenders would fail the second condition under Section 37, as their antecedents indicate a high likelihood of reoffending. The Court said that in such cases, the menace of drug addiction and trafficking must be given priority over personal liberty.
The Court also relied upon the Supreme Court judgment in Narcotics Control Bureau vs. Kashif, wherein it was held that in commercial quantity cases, rejection of bail is the rule and grant of bail is an exception. It further referred to Union of India vs. Namdeo Ashruba Nakade, observing that the rigour of Section 37 cannot be diluted in organised drug trafficking cases merely because the accused has remained in custody for more than a year.
The High Court underlined that when an accused is found to be a habitual offender with multiple cases of the same nature pending against him, public health and morality take precedence over personal liberty. Such cases, the Court said, require a stance of “zero leniency”, as drug trafficking has assumed alarming proportions and poses a serious threat to society, particularly the youth.
Finding no merit in the bail application, the Court dismissed the plea. (JNF) |
