TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 535
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... expected to be filed in a proximate time. Subsequently the complaint was filed for offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c), 23(c), 29 NDPS Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is employed with M/s Pooja Fabrics, run by the pairokar through which this bail application has been filed, having its establishment at Mohan Singh Market, INA, New Delhi -23. The petitioner has been employed with said employer since the last 12 to 13 years and draws a salary of Rs. 15,000/- per month from said employer. The employer / pairokar was present in Court and confirmed the aforementioned position. 4. Employer of the petitioner is engaged in the vocation of retail, trade and export of all types of fabrics from India under an EXIM license, issued by the Director General of Foreign Trade. At the said shop, customers come to purchase various types of fabrics and sometimes customers request shipping their parcels to overseas destinations through courier companies including DHL Express having local offices in the vicinity. The petitioner, upon instructions of the employer, calls the local field boys of these courier companies for shipment of a parcel for a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by NCB that "during investigation a courier employee also disclosed that one Nigerian person was making inquiry regarding the parcel in question and he has provided his contact number, thereafter the said Nigerian was contacted and asked him to collect his parcel to which the Nigerian sent the accused No.2 to collect his parcel. Accordingly, accused No.2 came to the courier office for making inquiry/collecting backed the parcel in question, therefore she was examined and her statement was recorded. Wherein she disclosed about the investigation about the present case". It is therefore submitted that even at that stage the fact that the package belonged to the Nigerian national and the accused No.2 was to collect the return of the package was confirmed; - thirdly, attention is drawn to the remand application dated 21st November 2022, where the same fact has again been recorded. It is submitted therefore that despite a PC remand of the petitioner, no new facts have come to light and investigation of the NCB had revealed only what has been stated in said remand applications. The exact same position is also stated in the extension of remand application dated 5th December, 2022; - fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....relies upon the fact that the consignor of the said package was the petitioner himself. Further reliance is placed on the application of the twin conditions of Section 37 NDPS as per which jail is the rule and bail is the exception. 12. A perusal of the complaint would reveal that the parcel which was intercepted was cut open and amphetamine was recovered hidden inside the car spare parts which weighed 700 grams. The parcel was booked by the petitioner and Rs. 8800/- cash given by him. He stated that address of the receiver of the parcel was sent to him by the Nigerian on his Whatsapp, on his mobile number, and after booking the parcel he sent the tracking ID of the parcel to the Nigerian person. He also stated he could help nab the culprit on 18th November 2022. The Nigerian asked him to return the parcel to a lady whose mobile number was given to him and said she will come to collect the parcel. As per the complaint, the courier person Prabhat Giri stated that petitioner asked him to pick up the parcel from the shop and after ascertaining the weight at about 7.2 kg took Rs. 8,800/- from him. Then petitioner sent him the receiver's address to the courier person on Whatsapp. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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. 15. Further, the petitioner has been arrested and is in custody since November 2022 and the complaint was filed in May, 2023, when the matter was listed before the Court. At least prima facie there is nothing that has been revealed in six months between the arrest of the petitioner and the filing of the charge-sheet, which would serve to additionally incriminate the petitioner. 16. In view of the above facts and circumstances, 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 ....