Ashwani @ Kali vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi)
2020 Latest Caselaw 917 Del

$~32
*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                      Date of Decision: 11.02.2020

+        BAIL APPLN. 3074/2019
         ASHWANI @ KALI                             ..... Petitioner
                           Through:    Mr. Vishal Raj Sehijpal and
                                       Mr. Anwar A.Khan,
                                       Advocates.
                           versus
         THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
                                        ..... Respondent
                           Through:    Mr. G.M.Garlooqui, Ld. APP
                                       for the State
                                       ASI Narain Dass: PS
                                       Mahendra park.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
                              JUDGMENT

BRIJESH SETHI, J ( Oral)

1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of a bail application filed

under section 439 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner Ashwani @ Kali in FIR

No. 321/2019 u/s. 21/61/85 NDPS Act, PS Mahindra Park, New

Delhi.

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for bail on the

grounds that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated.

Petitioner is in judicial custody since 01.08.2019. It is submitted

that allegation of recovery of 5 gram 170 m.g. of heroin/smack from

the possession of petitioner is absolutely false and fabricated and the

alleged contraband was never in possession of the petitioner. It is,

therefore, prayed that petitioner be granted bail in the interest of

justice.

3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the following

case law:-

a. Mohd. Navi v. State, 2018 SCC Online Del 12959; b. Ajaz Mohd. Shafi Khan v. State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC Online Bom 20682;

c. Salma Suleman Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC Online Bom 13261.

4. I have gone through the said case law. However, the same are

distinguishable on the basis of facts and circumstances stated

therein. Moreover, no straitjacket formula can be laid down for grant

of bail. Each case depends upon its own peculiar facts and

circumstances.

5. Ld. APP for the state has opposed the bail application on the

ground that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature.

Petitioner is a serial offender and is involved in number of other

cases. Ld. APP for the state has, therefore prayed for dismissal of

the bail application.

6. I have considered the rival submissions. The prosecution

version is that on 31.07.2019, petitioner was apprehended and on his

personal search 5 gram 170 m. gram heroin/smack was recovered

from his right hand fist.

7. Perusal of record reveals that petitioner is also stated to be

previously involved in the following cases:-

 Sl.no.          FIR no. & PS                     Under Section

 1               224/2011-Adarsh Nagar            379/356/34 IPC

 2               378/2016, Jahangirpuri           393/34 IPC

 3               264/2018, Jahangirpuri           323/341/34 IPC

8. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has, however, argued that FIR

No. 264/2018 stands compounded and petitioner stands acquitted in

FIR No. 224/2011 and is on bail in FIR no. 378/2016. Ld. APP for

the State, however, submits that he is not aware of the said facts.

However, even if the submissions of Ld. Counsel for the petitioner

are believed, the petitioner is still involved in FIR No. 378/2016

under Section 393/34 IPC.

9. In view of above facts and keeping in mind the nature of

offence and previous involvement of the petitioner, no grounds for

bail are made out at this stage. The bail application is, therefore,

dismissed and stands disposed of accordingly.

BRIJESH SETHI, J FEBRUARY 11, 2020 Ak