Madhya Pradesh High Court
Suresh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 September, 2021
Author: Vishal Mishra
1 MCRC-31536-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-31536-2021
(SURESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
8
Jabalpur, Dated : 13-09-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Anil Khare, Senior Counsel with Shr Pranjal Diwakar, learned
counsel, for the applicant.
Shri Shivam Hazari, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
This is the first bail application under Section 439, Cr.P.C filed by the
applicant for grant of bail.
The applicant is arrested on 27.2.2021 by Police Station Station- Betul
Bazar, District-Betul in connection with Crime No.71/2021 for the offence
punishable under Sections 8, 18, 29 of NDPS Act.
It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the case and he has not committed any offence in any
manner. He is merely a driver of vehicle in question from which contraband
article as stated has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is
further submitted that the applicant is in custody since 27.2.2021. The
investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed in the matter. The
applicant is ready to abide with all the terms and conditions as may be
imposed by this Court while considering his application for grant of bail. He
has drawn attention to this Court to the complaint made by the wife of the
other co-accused Magsingh. But when no action was taken, an application
under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. was filed before the Special Judge (NDPS) Betul
pointing out the fact that necessary information and mobile numbers have
been provided to the Police Authorities for proper investigation into the
matter but despite of the same no action has been taken. The application has
been rejected by the trial Court. It is further pointed out that the CCTV
Footage has already been provided to the Police Authorities but the
Signature Not authorities have keeping silent over the matter and has not taken any initiative
SAN
Verified
Digitally signed by
MOHD IRFAN
SIDDIQUI
Date: 2021.09.15
10:53:24 IST
2 MCRC-31536-2021
to investigate into the matter and terms of the complaint made to the Senior
Police Authorities as there was involvement of two other Police Officers in
the matter whose named has been provided to the authorities. The applicant is
a first offender and looking to the custody period of the applicant, counsel
for the applicant prays for grant of bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the following
judgments i.e. (2015) 8 SCC 744, (2018) 5 SCC 311, (2019) 17 SCC 1,
(2021) 1 SCC 184, passed by the Supreme Court with respect to the duty
of the police authorities to maintain the CCTV Cameras at the Police Station
and further on a judgment passed by the Hob'ble Supreme Court in (2012)
10 SCC 731 with respect to the right of the accused.
P er contra, learned counsel appearing for the State has vehemently
opposed the application stating that there is recovery of contraband article
from the possession of the present applicant. They were arrested on the spot
and the contraband article seized is more than a commercial quantity. The
F.S.L. report has not received till date. It is argued that looking to the nature
of offences which are increasing in the society at large, no case of bail is
made out. Hence, he prayed for rejection of this bail.
Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case as well as
the active participation of the applicant in the commission of offence coupled
with the fact that there is a recovery of contraband article from the
possession of the present applicant, this court is not inclined to allow the
application at this stage.
Accordingly, this bail application stands rejected.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
irfan
Signature
SAN Not
Verified
Digitally signed by
MOHD IRFAN
SIDDIQUI
Date: 2021.09.15
10:53:24 IST
