Pranyesh @ Pintu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2060 MP

                                                                         1
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
                                                                     BEFORE
                                                  HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH
                                                             ON THE 15th OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                                                     MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 8143 of 2022

                                             Between:-
                                             PRANYESH @ PINTU S/O RAMCHANDRA SEN ,
                                             AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR
                                             INDRA AWAS COLONY, ASTA, DIST. SEHORE
                                             (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                       .....PETITIONER
                                             (BY SHRI HIMANSHU THAKUR)

                                             AND

                                             THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                             HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
                                             AVANTIPUR  BADODIYA, DIST.  SHAJAPUR
                                             (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                                             (BY SHRI GOPAL YADAV, PANEL LAWYER)

                                          This application coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
                                    Satyendra Kumar Singh passed the following:
                                                                             ORDER

Case diary is available.

With consent, heard finally.

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. The applicant is being implicated in crime No.180/2020, registered at police station Avantipur Badodiya, district Shajapur, for the offence punishable under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act.

Prosecution story in brief is that on 22.7.2020 at about 00.15 AM, the applicant along with other co-accused Akram and Dharmendra were found having carrying 20 Kgs. 800 Grams of cannabis, without having license for it.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that both the seizure witnesses namely Mahesh Parmar and Ratanlal have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. As per FSL report stems of the plants of Signature Not Verified SAN the cannabis were also found along with the seeds, leaves and flowers. If the Digitally signed by VIBHA PACHORI Date: 2022.02.16 10:26:34 IST weight of the stems be excluded from the seized contraband, the weight of the

seized contraband will be less than the commercial quantity, i.e., 20 Kgs.

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his submissions has placed reliance on the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of K.V. Ramasamy v/s. The Superintendent of Police Preventive Unit/Salem, passed in Criminal

Appeal 685 of 2004 vide judgment dt. 9.9.2009 and the order of this Court in the case of Ratanlal Kharadi v/s. State of M.P. passed in M.Cr.C.No.21921/2019 dated 4.10.2019 wherein, the applicant was granted the benefit of bail since the 'actual' cannabis was lesser in weight than the commercial quantity.

He further submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence and is in custody since 22.7.2020. The trial of the case will take considerably a long time to conclude. With the aforesaid, prays that application for grant of bail be allowed and applicant be released on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / State has opposed the bail application and submits that as the weight of the contraband is more than 20 Kgs, which comes under the commercial quantity therefore, looking to the Bar under Section 37 of NDPS Act, applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties as well as citations submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant, weight of the seized contraband, i.e., 2 0 Kgs & 800 Grams, statements of the seizure witnesses and also considering the fact that if weight of the stems be excluded from the seized contraband, the weight of the same may be less than the commercial quantity, hence without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the application for grant of bail filed on behalf of the applicant is allowed.

It is directed that upon applicant's furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, the applicant shall be released on bail, for his appearance before the concerned trial Court on all the dates, as may be fixed in this behalf by the said Court, till the completion of trial. Applicant is directed to abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

Signature Not Verified Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed and disposed off. SAN

Digitally signed by VIBHA PACHORI C.c. as per rules.

Date: 2022.02.16 10:26:34 IST

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE Vibha

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VIBHA PACHORI Date: 2022.02.16 10:26:34 IST