Surety Bond(जमानती): When No individual is Available, FDR comes to rescue

The case "Mahidul Sheikh vs. State of Haryana" involves the conviction and sentencing of Mahidul Sheikh for possessing 220 grams of heroin, an intermediate quantity under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985. Below is a detailed summary of the case based on the provided document:

Case Background

FIR Details: FIR No. 695 dated 07.11.2017, registered at Badshahpur Police Station, Gurugram under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

- Accused: Mahidul Sheikh, a resident of West Bengal.

- Allegations: Police received secret information about drug trafficking activities. A raid was conducted, resulting in the arrest of Mahidul Sheikh and another individual. During the raid, 220 grams of heroin and Rs.14,39,780/- in cash were recovered from a room rented by the accused

Trial and Sentencing

- Trial Court: The Special Judge convicted Mahidul Sheikh under Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act.

- Sentence:

- Rigorous imprisonment for ten years.

- Fine of Rs.1,00,000/-.

- In default of fine payment, an additional rigorous imprisonment for one year.

- The recovered cash amount was ordered to be forfeited to the State.

Legal Arguments and Appeals

- Applicant's Arguments:

- The quantity of heroin (220 grams) is less than the commercial quantity, thus not attracting the stringent conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

- The applicant is a first-time offender and has already served two years of the sentence.

- The imposed sentence is the maximum for an intermediate quantity

- State's Opposition:

- Granting bail may encourage drug peddling.

- Concerns about the accused absconding due to residing in a distant state.

- Amicus Curiae's Submission:

- Denying suspension of sentence solely based on the convict's residence would violate Article 21 of the Constitution of India, ensuring equal protection under the law.

- Proposed that courts should allow fixed deposits as an alternative to surety bonds for bail

Legal Provisions and Analysis

- NDPS Act Definitions:

- Commercial Quantity: Quantity greater than specified in the schedule (e.g., more than 250 grams for heroin).

- Small Quantity: Less than specified in the table.

- Intermediate Quantity: Quantity between small and commercial

- Court's Considerations:

- Supreme Court judgments emphasize that the restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply to intermediate quantities

- The applicant's adherence to court proceedings and the completion of two years of the sentence were factors in considering the suspension of the sentence

Fixed Deposit as जमानती

The court deliberates on whether an accused can be given the option to provide a fixed deposit instead of a surety bond for bail purposes

Analysis of Law:

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh has previously analyzed the scope of furnishing fixed deposits in place of surety while granting bail under Section 439 of the सीआरपीसी

Sections 436 to 439 CrPC relate to bails, and Section 445 CrPC provides for the deposit of a sum of money instead of executing a bond, applying to all bails, including those granted under sections 389, 390, 397, etc.

Implementation:

The court suggests that the accused should be given a choice between surety bonds and fixed deposits or direct electronic money transfers where facilities are available, with the option to switch between the modes.

A personal bond and two sureties or a fixed deposit made in favor of the Chief Judicial Magistrate are considered acceptable alternatives(mahidul-sheikh-vs-state…).

Fixed deposits can be made from any of the banks with a state stake of more than 50% or stable private banks, with automatic renewal of principal and interest reverting to the linked account

Practicality and Enforcement:

Using fixed deposits or electronic transfers instead of sureties could potentially improve the likelihood of the accused attending court since they are aware their money is safe and accruing interest, reducing the risk associated with sureties(mahidul-sheikh-vs-state…).

Detailed instructions on how to manage and submit fixed deposits, including ensuring online liquidation is disabled and informing the concerned court and bank branch, are provided(mahidul-sheikh-vs-state…).

This approach provides flexibility to the accused while ensuring that the court's interests are safeguarded.

The High Court, considering the cumulative factors and without commenting on the merits, found a case for the suspension of the sentence. Conditions were imposed for the execution of a bond for attendance, and the applicant was directed to surrender in case of dismissal of the appeal

Thanks For Visiting!!