CRL.P/3742/2026 of VARUN BABU Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 27 April 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3742 OF 2026

(439(Cr.PC) / 483(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

VARUN BABU

S/O BABU KUTTAN,

AGED ABOUT 22 Y EARS,

R/AT GIRIJALAYAM HOUSE,

SOORANAND POST,

KOLLAM DISTRICT,

KERALA STATE.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY HULIMAVU POLICE STATION,

REPRESENTED BY ITS

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT BUILDING,

BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY Ms. ASMA KOUSER., ADDL. SPP)

Digitally

signed by

PAVITHRA

N

Location:

High

Court of

Karnataka

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 439 CR.PC (FILED U/S 483 BNSS)

BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO PASS AN

ORDER RELEASING THE PETITIONER ON BAIL PENDING TRAIL

IN CRIME NO.7/2026 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT

POLICE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 20(b), 8(c), 21(c)

AND 22(C) OF NDPS ACT, 1985 NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF

THE HON’BLE XXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE

AND SPL. JUDGE FOR NDPS CASES AT BENGALURU.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD

AND

RESERVED

ON

23.04.2026,

COMING

ON

FOR

PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE

THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CAV JUDGMENT

1.

The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.1 seeking regular bail in Cr.No.7/2026 of respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b), 8(c), 21(c) and 22(c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

(for short, ‘NDPS’)

Brief facts of the case:

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 08.01.2026

at about 3.00 p.m. when the complainant was on patrolling duty, he has received credible information that an unknown person was selling narcotic drugs near Islamia Ground at Hulimavu. On receiving the said information and after

registering the case, the complainant went to the spot along with the staff and panchas on obtaining the permission from the higher officials and apprehended the accused and conducted the search. In the said search, the complainant and his team found 3.55 gms of brown colour tablets, 1.99 gms of yellow colour tablets, 19.31 gms MDMA crystals and 41 LSD

stripes weighing 0.46 gms. A detailed mahazar was drawn and the articles were seized. The investigation is in progress.

3.

Heard Sri.Ravindranath B Kamath, learned Senior Counsel along with Sri. Balakrishna M.R. for the petitioner and Ms.Asma Kouser, learned Addl. SPP for respondent-State.

4.

It is the submission of learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The procedure relating to conduct of search and seizure has not been followed. The petitioner was apprehended without informing the grounds of arrest. In fact, the grounds and reasons for arrest has not been communicated to him in the language known to him. Therefore, the petitioner has to be enlarged on bail by imposing suitable conditions. Making such

submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

5.

Per contra, learned Addl. SPP., for respondent - State vehemently submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Kerala. He has involved in a heinous offence.

Commercial quantity of contraband has been seized at his instance. The arrest formalities have duly been complied with.

In fact, the search and seizure has been effected in accordance with the provisions of the NDPS Act. Therefore, the petition has to be rejected.

6.

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the documents available on record, it appears that the case has been registered on 08.01.2026

around 5.30 p.m., the grounds of arrest produced along with the case documents indicate that the same were communicated to the accused on 08.01.2026. No doubt, the petitioner is from Kerala and the grounds of arrest ought to have been communicated to the petitioner in the language known to him, however, on perusal of the documents available on record, the grounds of arrest is in kannada language. The grounds of

arrest is mandatory and it must be communicated soon after arrest of the accused.

7.

It is further noted that merely because the petitioner hails from Kerala, it cannot be presumed that he does not understand the Kannada language. Moreover, this is a matter for trial. Prima facie, I am of the considered opinion that the Investigating Officer has complied with the necessary requirements regarding the arrest of the accused. The petitioner is alleged to have committed a heinous offence that is detrimental to society and threat to the nation. Therefore, it is not appropriate to grant bail. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: