The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) approached the Bombay High Court with a petition against an order passed by the Special Court under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, granting default bail to an accused by erroneously computing/calculating the period under medical examination within the period of 180 days granted for the filing of the chargesheet.
While the DRI said that they had filed the chargesheet on the 179th day, the court calculated it as 181 days.
CASE TIMELINE
The factual matrix of the case was that the officers of the DRI, Mumbai Zonal Unit, had specific intelligence about a passenger, Kitwana Ramadhani, a Tanzanian national (25), coming to Mumbai by Ethiopian Airways, from Addis Ababa on August 5, 2021, and that she had concealed some contraband in her baggage.
When she was intercepted, a capsule-shaped item with some powder material, which was wrapped in a condom, was recovered from inside her undergarment. The capsule contained cocaine and she informed the officials that she had also consumed similarly packed but smaller capsules.
Thereafter, she was produced before the Esplanade Magistrate court on that very day to seek permission to conduct her medical examination. The court sent her to the hospital where she purged 65 capsules until August 9.
Ramadhani was then summoned to the DRI office where in her statement she said that she was a Tanzania national and she used to run a kitchen restaurant in Dar-Es-Salaam and supply food to nearby shops on the street. She said that a lady named Ana lured her into smuggling cocaine to India with the help of some Nigerians and, in return, Ana promised her to give USD 4500 in addition to financing her travel and stay in India.
As Ramadhani was facing financial difficulties, she agreed to Ana’s offer while being fully aware that it was illegal. After her statement was recorded, Ramadhani was placed under arrest.
DRI PLEA
The DRI's plea filed through advocate Ruju Thakker states that the time the woman had spent in hospital purging the capsules could not have been calculated for the filing of the chargesheet.
"Ideally, the calculation of the said period ought to have begun from August 11, 2021. Thus DRI was well within the 180 day period when it filed the chargesheet on February 3, 2022," stated Thakker.
Thakker added, "The Impugned Order (of granting default bail) is bad in law as the said Order was passed on February 17, 2022, whereas the complaint/chargesheet had already been filed on February 3. Hence, as per settled principles of law, the Bail Application, which was preferred by the Accused on February 3, could not have been considered by the Special Court to begin with as the said right to default bail stands extinguished after the filing of the chargesheet."
Additionally, the plea states that "The Impugned Order is bad in law since it has overlooked the fact that the present statute i.e. NDPS is a strict and a stringent statute and the offence committed by the accused is grave and involves a commercial quantity of cocaine."
The bench of Justice NJ Jamadar heard Thakker's argument and stated that "the period for which the accused was admitted to JJ Hospital for the purpose of purging of the contraband material has been incorrectly taken into account by the Additional Sessions Judge in computing the period of 180 days. The accused was, in fact, arrested on August 9, 2021, and not on August 5, 2021."
Justice Jamadar added, "The issue as to whether the said period can be counted for the purpose of Section 167 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, requires consideration," and the high court issued notice to the accused and will further be hearing the case on June 29.