Bail exception where accused found with commercial quantity of drugs: Karnataka High Court

Cristian Soporuchukwu was arrested on April 5, 2025, by the police in Beguru near Bengaluru, after a tip-off and was allegedly found with the drugs in his two-wheeler. After taking the accused into custody, the team handed him over to the officers at the Beguru Police Station, along with seized materials, who in turn arrested him under the provisions of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

The police said they issued him an arrest memo and furnished the grounds of arrest. Later, the accused filed a bail application before the special court, which rejected his appeal.

Advocate Balakrishna M R, appearing for Soporuchukwu before the Karnataka High Court, argued that no “grounds of arrest” were furnished to him at the time of his arrest; therefore, bail should be granted as it is in violation of his rights under Article 22 of the Constitution.

Government Pleader Channappa Erappa opposed the petition, saying the accused is a Nigerian citizen who came to India on a business visa and overstayed without proper documents. Erappa said this fact would expose the petitioner’s intention.

He added that the arrest memo had been duly given to him, and that when he was produced before the trial court for remand, he had not raised any objection to the non-furnishing of the arrest memo or the non-communication of the arrest to his relatives.

Commercial quantity of drugs

The bench noted that, as per the seizure documents, the contraband seized from the accused is 1 kilogram, and each gram of MDMA is sold for approximately Rs 15,000 to Rs 20,000. “Seizure of 1 kg MDMA itself is significant in appreciating the case of the prosecution in opposing the bail request by the petitioner,” the bench said in the order.

The bench said Section 37 of the Act would be applicable, since the seized MDMA is of commercial quantity. “Legislature in its wisdom has employed specific words, whereby it is the accused who is required to establish before the Court that he is not guilty of the offences alleged against him. Insertion of the provision of law as per Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not without purpose. The same is intended to curb the menace of drug transporting, possessing, peddling, etc, which is harming the youth of this country.”

Observing that a person who is accused of an offence of murder, which is highly heinous, would enjoy the presumption that he is held to be innocent until the contrary is proved by the prosecution, Justice Srishananda said, “Such presumption of innocence is taken away in respect of a person who is accused of possessing or transporting a commercial quantity of NDPS.”

The bench observed that one kilogram of MDMA is not a substance that is easily available in the market and therefore rejected the suggestion that the police could have planted the contraband to falsely implicate the accused.

“Grounds of bail petition would not make out that there existed a previous enmity or animosity between the head of the raid party and the accused. Therefore, this court does not find any good reasons to grant bail on the merits of the matter.”

Rejecting the contention of the accused that the grounds of arrest were not furnished, the bench said, “The petitioner being a Nigerian citizen, the investigation officer took necessary precaution to furnish the grounds of arrest in English language.”

“There was no loss of time in producing the petitioner before the learned judge, who had also inquired of the accused whether there was any harassment or ill-treatment by the police. The accused had then voluntarily answered to the learned judge that there was no ill-treatment and his arrest had been informed to his friend.”

“This court is of the concerned opinion that in the case on hand, the grounds of arrest furnished to the accused are sufficient compliance with the mandatory requirement as per Article 22 of the Constitution of India.”

“While on one hand, non furnishing of grounds of arrest, or improper compliance of furnishing the grounds of arrest would be a good ground for grant of bail in all offences, on the other hand, where the accused is alleged of possessing commercial property of NDPS would not be permitted to gain a back door entry in getting the bail on the ground of improper compliance of furnishing grounds of arrest.”

Accordingly, the bench dismissed the petition.