Devilal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 7630 MP

                             1           M.Cr.C..No.51603 / 2021




HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE

                   M.Cr.C..No.51603 of 2021
                   (Devilal vs. State of M.P.)

Indore dt.22.11.2021.

      Ms. Nupur Garg, learned counsel for the applicant.
      Shri P. Choudhary, learned P.L. for respondent/State.

Heard.

This is the third bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 28.5.2016 in connection with Crime No.266/2016, registered at Police Station Neemuch city district Neemuch, for the offences punishable under Section 8/21 and 29 of NDPS Act.

As per prosecution story, on 28.5.2016, police received the secret information from informant that present applicant is having in possession of smack and standing near Balaji temple at Jetpura Fanta. Acting upon this information, police reached on the spot and recovered 350 gms. of smack from the bag, which the present applicant was holding. Accordingly, offence was registered against him.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. The applicant is in custody since 28.5.2016. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed, but after expiry of the 5 years, prosecution evidence and trial is still pending. Applicant is 45 years of age. He is a farmer and there is no apprehension after getting bail he flee from the Court of

justice or tempering with the evidence. He is a permanent resident of district Neemuch.

Learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Prakash Dhaker vs. State of M.P., passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1075/2017, decided on 15.12.2017 and prayed that on the similar ground, the applicant deserves the benefit of bail.

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent - State opposes the bail application, by submitting that the seized quantity of contraband is more than the commercial quantity and applicant is having criminal antecedents registered against him. In view of the evidence available on record, the present applicant does not deserve the bail.

Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order passed by the Court below.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence and also taking note of the fact that the seized quantity of contraband is more than commercial quantity and applicant is having 3 criminal antecedents including NDPS and other offences. The facts of the present case is distinguishable with the case of Prakash Dhaker vs. State of M.P. (supra). After perusal of the statements of the prosecution witnesses filed by the applicant, it reveals that trial is still continue and so many witnesses have been examined before the trial Court.

In view of the above, without commenting on merits of the case, this court is of the opinion that at this stage present

applicant does not deserve the benefit of bail.

The bail application stands rejected.

                                          (ANIL VERMA)
                                               JUDGE

SS/-        Digitally signed by
            SHAILESH MAHADEV
            SUKHDEVE
            Date: 2021.11.22 18:42:46
            +05'30'