Saroj Bai Manathakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1158 MP

                                                         1                           MCRC-16045-2021
                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                         MCRC-16045-2021

(SAROJ BAI MANATHAKUR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Jabalpur, Dated : 31-03-2021 Shri Vinod Kumar Rishi, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Anoop Sonker, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Case diary is available.

This is the third/repeat bail application filed by the applicant/accused under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail who is in custody since

31.08.2020 in connection with Crime No.1222/2020 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Seoni for the offences under Sections 8/20 of NDPS Act.

First bail application i.e. M.Cr.C. No.48646/2020 was dismissed after considering the merits of the matter vide order dated 06.01.2021.

It is noted that second bail application was dismissed on merit vide order dated 09.03.2021 i.e. 21 days before.

As per the prosecution story, 1 kg 100 grams of contraband (Ganja) has been seized from the possession of applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent

and has been falsely implicated. Charge sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that minimum quantity of contraband has been seized from the applicant. The applicant is an old widow lady aged about 55 years. She is in custody since 3/09/2020 and trial will take time to conclude. In support of his arguments, he has relied on the judgment of the apex Court in the case of Arif Khan @ Agha Khan vs . State of Uttarakhand reported in II (2018) CCR 191 (SC) and in the case of Shri Thukchuk Lachungpa vs. State of Sikkim, reported in IV (2000) CCR 235 (SC). On the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel for the applicant has prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the submission made on behalf of

Signature Not t h e applicant. He submits that there is no material changed in the SAN Verified

Digitally signed by PRASHANT BAGJILEWALE Date: 2021.04.01 17:42:16 IST 2 MCRC-16045-2021 circumstances to consider this repeat bail application. Apart from this, as many as 16 criminal cases have been registered against the applicant including the cases under NDPS Act. With these submissions prayed to dismiss the application.

Having heard both the parties and perused the entire record including the case diary.

It is noted that earlier bail application was dismissed after considering the merits of the matter. The applicant is a habitual offender and as many as 16 criminal cases have been registered against her for the offence punishable under the Excise Act and N.D.P.S. Act.

In the cited case Shri Thukchuk Lachungpa (supra), it is observed that except one in all other cases he was acquitted or discharged. Therefore, cited case is distinguishable on facts. In the present case, the applicant was carrying the contraband in plastic carry bag and she was holding in her hands. Carrying the contraband in the vehicle/bag cannot be said to be "by the person" necessitating compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act for personal search. Reference in this regard can be made to the decision in State of H.P. vs. Pawan Kumar (2005) 4 SCC 350.

The apex Court in the case of Ashok alias Dangra Jaiswal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2011) 5 SCC 123, h a s observed that seizure witnesses turning hostile may not be a very significant by itself, as it is not an uncommon phenomenon in criminal trials, particularly in cases relating to NDPS Act.

In the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhatisgarh 2007 Cr.LJ. 2766 (SC) has held that at the time of consideration of bail, the Court cannot consider the veracity of statements given by the prosecution witnesses, this can only be done at the time of disposal of the case on the basis of merit of the matter.

Considering the aforesaid legal position and the fact that there is no substantial change to take a different view than the view already taken while 3 MCRC-16045-2021 dismissing the earlier bail application just 21 days before. Consequently, the repeat bail application filed u/s 439 of Cr.P.C is hereby dismissed.

(AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

pb