TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he was merely an intermediary who was used to courier the package which did not belong to him. There is no evidence in the complaint that the package belonged to the petitioner, in that he was the one who was packing and dispatching the contraband. There are call records to show that messages have been received from the Nigerian and that the return parcel was to be collected by the person sent by the Nigerian. At this stage, the benefit of doubt would have to go to the petitioner as not being the owner and possessor of the said package of contraband. In the considered opinion of this Court, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence as alleged. Furthermore, considering he has no previous involvements and that his conduct and work has been certified by his employer and there is no adverse information regarding his past, it would be prudent to believe that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Ld. Trial Court, further subject to the conditions imposed - appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n origin stating his name as Ike , used to come to the shop and purchase cloth. On 12th November 2022, said Ike arrived at the shop and after purchasing cloth, handed over some boxes that he wanted to shipped overseas to Melbourne, Australia and consequently requested if it could be couriered by the agencies that the shop deals with. Accordingly, the petitioner called the field boy of the courier company, DHL Express who spoke to the concerned person and took the boxes for the purpose of couriering. 6. It transpired later that the said box belonging to the Nigerian person Ike, was couriered using the identity details of the petitioner. On 16th November, 2022, some officers of NCB arrived at the shop to inquire about the petitioner and he mentioned that he was working at the said shop since the last 12-13 years. Further inquiries were made regarding whether he had sent any box through DHL company to Australia and the petitioner narrated the aforementioned facts to them about the Nigerian national. 7. At the behest of the NCB officials, petitioner called the Nigerian national and asked him to collect back his parcel, but instead he mentioned the name of a lady, one Abigail Mom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nationals while the role of the petitioner was limited to the use of his identity papers for couriering. However, the status report now suggests that he has confessed his involvement in the present crime as per the disclosure recorded, which is not admissible as per the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu; - fifthly, it is contended that there was clearly no conscious possession, in any event, and therefore none of the presumptions under the NDPS Act would apply; - sixthly, it was reiterated that it was evident from the investigation that as per the statement of the courier employee, the Nigerian national was making inquiries regarding the parcel in question and had provided his contact number. Therefore, the allegation that the petitioner was in fact the one who was in touch with the Nigerian national and was conspiring with him to send the contraband, is untenable and unsustainable; - seventhly, it is contended that there will be no benefit to the petitioner regarding couriering the package and as an employee of the said shop for the last 12 to 13 years, he would naturally not risk his employment and his livelihood. 9. Learned c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d booking to international destinations through different couriers. 13. Having considered the respective contentions of the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that prima facie it seems that the petitioner was not the owner of the package and had merely facilitated the booking of the package with the courier company on behalf of and at the request of the Nigerian national. This seems prima facie possible from the sequence of events in that when the NCB approached the petitioner on 16th November, 2022, the petitioner stated clearly that he had indeed booked the parcel for the Nigerian and sent the receiver details through Whatsapp to the courier person. This was further corroborated by the statement recorded by the courier person. Also, upon asking of the NCB, the petitioner continued to communicate with the Nigerian Ike and told him regarding the return of the package. Pursuant to his communication with the Nigerian, that the lady Abigail Momah was sent to collect the return of the package. This would possibly show that he was merely an intermediary who was used to courier the package which did not belong to him. There is no other evidence placed yet as part of char ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Hon ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Muslim v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine SC 352 where the Hon ble Supreme Court has stated in a matter relating to NDPS: 20. A plain and literal interpretation of the conditions under Section 37 (i.e., that Court should be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and would not commit any offence) would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether, resulting in punitive detention and unsanctioned preventive detention as well. Therefore, the only manner in which such special conditions as enacted under Section 37 can be considered within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the material on record (whenever the bail application is made) that the accused is not guilty. Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 21. The standard to be considered therefore, is one, where the court would look at the material in a broad manner, and reasonably see whether the accused's guilt may be proved. The judgments of this court have, therefore, emphasized that the satisfaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
