Gujarat High Court
Sajid Akhtar Abusufiyan Ansari vs State Of Gujarat on 14 September, 2022
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/5582/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/09/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 5582 of 2022
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 5585 of 2022
==========================================================
SAJID AKHTAR ABUSUFIYAN ANSARI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHDDANISH M BAREJIA(10612) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR JK SHAH APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 14/09/2022
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Barejia, learned advocate for the
applicants and Mr. J.K. Shah, learned APP for the
respondent State.
2. As both the applications arising out of the same FIR,
both were heard together and are being disposed of
by this common order.
3. The applicants, by way of this application filed under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeks
regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.
No. 11210046212462 of 2021 registered with
Puna Police Station, Dist. Surat, for the offences
punishable under Sections 8(C), 21ii(c) and 29 of
R/CR.MA/5582/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/09/2022
NDPS Act, 1988.
4. Brief facts of the present case are that, 34.390 kgs of
Ganja recovered from the conscious possession of
the accused no. 1. Pursuant to statement of co-
accused i.e. accused no. 1, present applicants have
been apprehended in the alleged offence. In such
circumstances, the chargesheet came to be filed
against the applicants for aforesaid offences.
5. Mr. Barejia, learned advocate appearing for the
applicants submitted that nothing incriminating
material found from the conscious possession of the
applicants. Relying upon the decision in case of
Toofansinh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in
(2021) 4 SCC page-1, it is submitted that facts of
confessional statement of co-accused will remain
inadmissible in the trial for offence under the N.D.P.S.
Act.
6. On the other hand, learned APP Mr. J.K. Shah
contended that quantity is commercial quantity and
therefore, considering the embargo of Section 37, no
case is made out for exercising the discretion in
favour of applicants.
R/CR.MA/5582/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/09/2022
7. Having heard learned counsel for the respective
parties and upon perusal of the material placed on
record in form of chargesheet, it appears that based
on statement of co-accused, applicants have been
apprehended in the alleged offence. During the
course of investigation, nothing incriminating
material found from the conscious possession of the
applicants. In such circumstances, applying the ratio
of the judgment in case of Toofansinh (supra),
without commenting anything on the merits of the
case, I inclined to release the applicants on bail.
Hence, present applications are allowed.
8. Hence, the applicants are ordered to be released on
regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R.
No. 11210046212462 of 2021 registered with
Puna Police Station, Dist. Surat, on executing a
personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousands
only) each, with one surety each of the like amount
to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and
subject to the conditions that they shall:
No. Conditions
(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or
misuse liberty;
(b) not act in a manner injuries to the interest of
the prosecution;
R/CR.MA/5582/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/09/2022
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower court
within a week;
(d) not leave India without prior permission of
the Sessions Judge concerned;
(e) furnish latest address of residence to the
Investigating Officer and also to the Court at
the time of execution of the bond and shall
not change the residence without prior
permission of the trial Court;
9. The authorities shall release the applicants if they are
not required in connection with the any other
offence. If breach of any above condition is
committed, the Sessions Judge concerned shall take
appropriate action or issue warrant against the
applicants. The bail bond to be executed before the
learned trial Court having jurisdiction to try the case.
It will be open for the sessions judge concerned to
delete, modify and/or relax any of the above
conditions, in accordance with law. Nothing stated
hereinabove, shall tantamount to the expression of
any opinion on the merits of this case. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent in both the matters.
Direct service permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
P.S. JOSHI
