KOCHI: An alleged drug trafficker’s attempt to secure bail highlighting his cancer-patient status fell flat as the court observed that cancer is not a reason to ignore the crime committed by him. While refusing him bail, the court however affirmed the government has the full responsibility to provide the accused proper treatment while in judicial custody. The police had strongly opposed his bail application.
Abdul Salam, 26, of Bakel in Kasaragod, was arrested by the Kochi police on February 28 around 8.30pm for alleged possession of 8.120 grams of MDMA tablets and 0.38 grams of crystal MDMA. The drug was found in a car, with the registration number KL 48F 6597 parked near an apartment at Ponekkara. He was booked under various sections of the NDPS and later remanded in judicial custody by a court.
“We nabbed him on the basis of specific intelligence input. Similar cases are pending against him. We apprised the court of his criminal antecedents and managed to convince the court that granting him bail in the middle of a probe would not be prudent,” a police officer said.
Salam, in his second bail application filed on April 20, submitted that he was innocent and that he was falsely implicated in the case. He also submitted that he was suffering from cancer and required treatment.
His first bail application was rejected by the same court observing that there was evidence to show his involvement in the offence alleged against him.
Dismissing his application on April 26, Judge G Girish said: “The mere fact that the accused is said to be suffering from cancer is not a reason to ignore the adverse circumstances existing against him and to grant bail in this case. As regards the ailment of the accused, the state is having the full responsibility to administer proper treatment to him while he remains in judicial custody. It is of no doubt that the release of the petitioner on bail would adversely affect the investigation. Going by the nature of the accused, who is having criminal antecedents, the chances of him involving in further narcotic offences under the cover of his ailment, cannot be ruled out.”