| |
CDJ 2026 DHC 533
|
| Court : High Court of Delhi |
| Case No : Bail Appln. No. 3146 of 2026 & CRL.M.A. No. 23714 of 2026 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA |
| Parties : Kouame Faustin Kouman Versus Customs |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Javed Khan, Advocate. For the Respondent: Gibran Naushad, SSC, Suraj Shekhar Singh, Advocate. |
| Date of Judgment : 06-08-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
NDPS Act - Section 8/21/23/28 -
Comparative Citation:
2026 DHC 6377,
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 8 NDPS Act
- Section 21 NDPS Act
- Section 23 NDPS Act
- Section 28 NDPS Act
- Section 37 NDPS Act
2. Catch Words:
- bail
- commercial quantity
- twin conditions
- NDPS Act
- excretion
- custody
- medical reasons
3. Summary:
The accused sought regular bail for alleged offences under Sections 8, 21, 23 and 28 of the NDPS Act after 86 capsules containing heroin and cocaine were excreted from his body at IGI Airport and subsequently in a hospital. The defence argued that the period of custody from 21‑04‑2022 to 25‑04‑2022 was illegal and that he had already spent four years in detention. The prosecution contended that the quantity seized constituted a commercial amount, invoking the twin conditions of Section 37 NDPS Act, and that the accused consented to hospitalisation, making the custody lawful. The court noted the seriousness of drug trafficking, its link to terrorism financing, and the need to uphold the reverse‑burden provision. It held that procedural lapses, if any, could not override the statutory requirements for bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed |
| Judgment :- |
|
Judgment (Oral)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in File/C.No. VIII(AP)(10)P&I/3442-DArrival/2022 of PS IGI Airport for offence under Section 8/21/23/28 of NDPS Act.
2. Broadly speaking, allegation against the accused/applicant is that he was apprehended at the IGI Airport after which 86 capsules containing 1539 grams heroin and 172 grams cocaine were excreted out of his body.
3. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that he is in custody for past four years and no purpose would be served by keeping him in jail. Further, it is contended that initially, on 21.04.2022 at the airport itself 21 capsules were excreted out of his body and thereafter he was taken to hospital where till 25.04.2022, more capsules were excreted out of his body, therefore, custody of the accused/applicant from 21.04.2022 till 25.04.2022 was illegal. It is submitted by learned counsel that the last capsule excreted out of body of the accused/applicant was on 22.04.2022.
4. Learned counsel for respondent Customs accepts notice and strongly opposes the bail application on the ground that the quantity of contraband recovered from the accused/applicant was admittedly commercial quantity, so the twin conditions under Section 37 NDPS Act have to be satisfied. As regards the custody from 21.04.2022 to 25.04.2022, it is contended that the same was with consent of the accused/applicant for medical reasons. As regards the period from 22.04.2022 to 25.04.2022, it is contended by prosecution side that the accused/applicant was discharged from hospital only on 25.04.2022 as per medical record. Therefore, according to the legal position, this cannot be a ground to grant bail to the accused/applicant.
5. As mentioned above, according to prosecution case, from body of the accused/applicant, 86 capsules containing 1539 grams heroin and 172 grams cocaine were recovered. Admittedly, the contraband allegedly recovered is a commercial quantity.
6. Merely because immediately after excretion of 21 capsules at airport the accused/applicant was not produced before the magistrate, keeping in mind the explanation that the accused/applicant himself consented to be taken to hospital for medical reasons and in the hospital, the remaining 65 capsules were excreted out, it cannot be treated as illegal custody.
7. The Court cannot ignore that the evil effect of drug peddling is not just to intoxicate the consumers thereof. A major part of the terrorism funding comes out of drug peddling. The courts have to be conscious of the ground realities in which such criminals are apprehended and are taken through the process. The procedural lapses even if any, cannot be allowed to make inroads into the twin conditions laid down under Section 37 NDPS Act, otherwise the whole purpose of insertion of this unique provision of reverse burden would get demolished.
8. Considering the above circumstances, I do not find it fit case to grant bail, therefore, the bail application and the accompanying application are dismissed.
|
| |
