Sessions Court rejects bail petition of yoga teacher

PANAJI

The Sessions Court on Saturday rejected the bail plea of a yoga teacher, accused of illegally possessing commercial quantities of MDMA (Ecstasy) and Cocaine.

The accused, who has been in custody since his arrest on January 23, 2025, is charged with allegedly possessing 15.04 gms of MDMA worth Rs 1.50 lakh and 50.03 gms of Cocaine valued at Rs 6 lakh. If convicted, he could be jailed for a maximum of 10 years of rigorous imprisonment with fines under the NDPS Act.

During the hearing of his plea, the accused, who claimed to be a reputed national and international yoga instructor, argued that he had been falsely implicated and subjected to physical and mental harassment by the Anti-Narcotics Cell. Moreover, he was not produced before a magistrate in accordance with the law, rendering it “ab initio void.”

The Public Prosecutor, however, countered these claims, citing the panchanama and medical certificates, which showed no delay in producing the accused before the magistrate. The PP also stated that the injury sustained was two days old, predating police custody.

The court noted that allegations of planting contraband were unsubstantiated. However, it concluded these were matters for trial and could not form a basis for bail at this stage.

“As far as allegation of planting is concerned, it is very hard to believe that the investigation agency could arrange such a huge amount only to implicate the accused and there is nothing on record to suggest that there was any personal grudge or rivalry between the accused and the IO and all this is a matter of evidence, where multiple inferences are possible, and the Court cannot decide in favour of any one without any concrete evidence,” Judge Apurva Nagvenkar, Additional Sessions Judge-2, Mapusa, said.

After considering arguments from both sides, the court held that the material on record was prima facie sufficient to demonstrate the accused’s involvement in the crime.

“... the accused has failed to demonstrate that there are reasonable grounds to believe that he was not guilty of the offences alleged against him, and hence, at this stage the accused is not entitled for bail. The material produced on record is prima-facie sufficient to show involvement of the accused in the crime,” it said while dismissing the bail plea.