Panchuram Saini vs Kendriya Narkotiks Beuro
2022 Latest Caselaw 4304 MP

                              1
         THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                  M.Cr.C. No.12955/2022
         Panchuram Saini Vs. Central Narcotic Bureau

Gwalior, Dated:28/03/2022

      Shri Sushil Goswami, Advocate for applicant.

      Shri Praveen Newaskar, Assistant Solicitor General for

respondent.

This second application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been

filed for grant of bail. The first application was dismissed as

withdrawn by order dated 1/2/2022 passed in M.Cr.C.

No.64228/2021.

The applicant has been arrested on 14/11/2021 in connection

with Crime No.6/2021 registered at Central Narcotics Bureau,

Gwalior for offence under Section 8/20 of NDPS, Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that 6.102 kg of

Ganja was seized from the possession of the applicant. He is in jail

from 14/11/2021. Charge-sheet has been filed.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the State. It is submitted that in view of the bar as

contained under Section 37 of the NDPS, Act, the applicant is not

entitled for bail. To buttress his contentions, the counsel for the

respondent has relied upon the judgments passed by the Supreme

Court in the cases of State of Kerala and Others Vs. Rajesh and

Others reported in (2020) 12 SCC 122 as well as Union of India

through Narcotics Control Bureau, Lucknow v. Md. Nawaz Khan

reported in AIR 2021 SCW 4476 and Union of India Vs. Md.

Jamal by order dated 4/3/2022 passed in SLP (Cri.)

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.12955/2022 Panchuram Saini Vs. Central Narcotic Bureau

No.1596/2022.

However, it is submitted by Shri Goswami that the provisions

of Section 37 of the NDPS, Act would not apply because neither the

offence under Sections 19, 24 or 27-A of the NDPS, Act is involved

nor the commercial quantity of the contraband has been seized.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Looking to the quantity of Ganja, i.e. 6.102 kg, seized from the

possession of the applicant when he was travelling in a running train,

this Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case for grant

of bail.

Accordingly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Arun* ARUN KUMAR MISHRA 2022.03.29 18:39:09 +05'30'