Gujarat HC Denies Bail to Accused in Mephedrone Case, Cites 'Death-Blow' To Young Victims

The Gujarat High Court has rejected the regular bail application of an accused involved in a commercial Mephedrone trafficking case, making strong observations on the lethal impact of narcotics on society.

A Single Judge bench dismissed the plea filed by Irfan alias Chino Makrani, who was arrested in connection with an FIR registered at Lalgate Police Station in Surat City after police seized 204.700 grams of Mephedrone valued at ₹20.47 lakh.

'Death-Blow To A Number Of Innocent Young Victims'

The court observed that the seriousness of cases under the NDPS Act must be viewed differently from ordinary criminal cases, noting that while a person accused in a murder case may cause the death of one or two people, those involved in dealing in narcotic drugs can cause death or inflict a "death-blow" on a number of innocent young victims.

The court said narcotics have "deleterious effects and deadly impact on the society", adding that organised activities involving the illegal trafficking and clandestine smuggling of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances have contributed to drug addiction among a sizeable section of the public, particularly adolescents and students.

The bench observed that the menace had assumed "serious and alarming proportions" in recent years.

'Liberty Of Citizen Has To Be Balanced With Interest Of Society'

The court further observed that the liberty of a citizen has to be balanced with the interests of society.

"In cases where narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances are involved, the accused would indulge in activities which are lethal to the society," the court said, adding that keeping such persons behind bars during the pendency of proceedings could be in the interest of society.

The bench also noted that Parliament had introduced special provisions under the NDPS Act to effectively control and eradicate the growing menace of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.

Court Finds Strong Evidence Against Accused

The court further noted that the applicant was allegedly a main supplier and had been in continuous contact with the co-accused. A money trail and Call Detail Record (CDR) evidence were also cited as linking him to the other accused.

The court also took note of the applicant's two previous antecedents under the NDPS Act and two under the Indian Penal Code.

Bail Denied, Section 37 Conditions Not Satisfied

The high court declined to grant the accused the benefit of parity with other co-accused, observing that the mandatory twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not satisfied.

The court consequently rejected the regular bail application and directed the trial court to conclude the proceedings expeditiously.