During a raid, it was found that the Petitioner was harvesting ganja and the same was found in bags. The Karnataka High Court gave liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court as the ganja was of intermittent quantity and the investigation was not yet completed.
Brief Facts of the Case
In Sri. Hanumantharayappa vs State Of Karnataka, on 26 November, 2020 the factual matrix of the case is that on 06.10.2020, on credible information, when the land bearing Sy.No.110 was raided, the petitioner was found that he was harvesting ganja. And the ganja was found in four bags and in three bags 13 kgs. 700 grams of ganja was found and seized under mahazar.
Submission of the Petitioner
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case does not deal with Section 37 of the NDPS Act and the ganja, as alleged is not within the definition of NDPS Act. The three bags contained ganja and the fourth bag contained only the stem. The same is also not commercial quantity and no document is collected with regard to the said land belongs to the petitioner.
Submission of the Respondent
The learned Government Pleader High Court appearing for the State would submit that the investigation is not yet completed and no details of criminal antecedents has been collected. The Police arrested the petitioner on 06.10.2020 and investigation is in progress and yet to collect the details as to whether the property belongs to him or not. According to the information, the same belongs to the father-in-law of the petitioner. The quantity of seized ganja is 13 kgs. 700 gms. and the Court is supposed to take note of the quantity. However, the ganja is not commercial quantity. As it is a serious offence against the Society, the petitioner should not get bail.
Observation of the Court
The Court observed that the raid was conducted on credible information and found ganja along with the petitioner to the extent of 13 kgs. 700 gms. Though it is not commercial quantity, the same is intermittent quantity and investigation is not yet completed and yet to collect the documents in respect of the particular survey number. Hence, the case is not a fit one to exercise the powers under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. when the investigation is not completed.
Order of the Court
The Court rejected the petition and gave liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court after filing of the charge-sheet.
Click here to view original judgment
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
