Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hanslal Belvanshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 July, 2021
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
1 MCRC-18857-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-18857-2021
(HANSLAL BELVANSHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 09-07-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri V.K. Namdeo, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Sunil Gupta, learned PL for the respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is second bail application filed by the applicant under Section
439 of Cr.P.C. Applicant Hanslal Belvanshi was arrested on 17/09/2020
in connection with Crime No.411/2020 registered at Police Station
Parasia, District Chhindwara (M.P.) for the offence punishable under
Section 8/20 of NDPS Act.
Earlier applications filed by the applicant was dismissed on merit
by this court vide order dated 22.01.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.
No.48947/2020.
As per the prosecution case, on 16.09.2020 on the information of
informant that the applicant cultivated Ganja plants (in the middle of
maize crop) in his field situated back of his house at village Kondara
Bundela, Sub-Inspector Parasnath Armo along with police force went to
the spot where they found plantation of 1573 Ganja plants in the field of
applicant. On that they seized 1573 Ganja plants from the possession of
applicant, which were illegally planted by him and they were found to be
weighing 212 Kg. and 580 grams.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innovent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. It is further
submitted that the land on which the ganja plants were planted, was not
belongs to the applicant. The applicant did not cultivate that plants. Due
to family dispute, applicant was falsely implicated in the crime.
Applicant has been in custody since 17/09/2020 and conclusion of trial
will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.
Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and
submitted that sufficient evidence is available on record to connect the
applicant with the offence in question. So, he should not be released on
bail.
Earlier applications filed by the applicant was dismissed on merit
Signature Not Verified
by this court vide order dated 22.01.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.
SAN
No.48947/2020 and thereafter there has been no change in circumstances,
Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR
Date: 2021.07.09 17:54:47 IST
2 MCRC-18857-2021
except the custody period.
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Ranjan Yadav alias Pappu
Yadav v. CBI Through its Director reported in (2007) 1 SCC 70 held
that bail, can not be granted solely on the ground of long incarnation in
jail and inability of accused to conduct the defence. Apex Court in the
case of State of M.P. v. Kajad, (2001) 7 SCC 673 observed "It is true
that successive bail applications are permissible under the changed
circumstances. But without the change in the circumstances, the second
application would be deemed to be seeking review of the earlier
judgment which is not permissible under criminal law as has been held
by this Court in Hari Singh Mann v. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa [(2001)
1 SCC 169 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 113] and various other judgments."
It is alleged that applicant illegally cultivated ganja plants and
police seized 1573 ganja plants weighing 212 Kg and 580 grams from the
possession of applicant. So looking to the facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
Hence, the application is hereby dismissed.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY)
JUDGE
mn
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR
Date: 2021.07.09 17:54:47 IST
