Organised vehicle theft linked to drug trafficking justified denial of bail despite the accused not being named in the FIR.

Organised vehicle theft linked to drug trafficking was treated as a serious prima facie criminal enterprise, where tampering with engine, chassis and registration numbers and supplying vehicles to traffickers engaged narcotics-law exposure for allowing use of a conveyance, indirect financing of illicit traffic, and abetment. Although the petitioner was not named in the FIR, the Court relied on the material showing gang involvement, the petitioner's extensive criminal antecedents, and his status as a proclaimed offender to refuse enlargement on bail at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in view of the allegations of organized vehicle theft linked to drug trafficking and the petitioner's criminal antecedents.

Analysis: The petitioner was not named in the FIR, but the material before the Court showed a prima facie organized gang engaged in stealing luxury vehicles, tampering with engine, chassis and registration numbers, and supplying them to drug traffickers. The allegations also attracted liability for allowing use of a conveyance for offences under the narcotics law and for indirect financing of illicit traffic and abetment. The petitioner's extensive criminal history and the fact that he had been declared a proclaimed offender weighed against enlargement on bail at that stage.

Conclusion: Bail was declined.

---