Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajij Shaj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2023
Author: Pranay Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
ON THE 18th OF AUGUST, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 35499 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
AJIJ SHAJ S/O MOLANA SHAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: DRIVER R/O KOTDA BAHADUR P.S.
NAHAR GARH DISTT. MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI NILESH DAVE, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION JEERAN
DISTRICT NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(MS. VIBHA BHARUKA - ADVOCATE FOR STATE)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
They are heard. Perused the case diary /challan papers.
2. This is the first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973, as the applicant is implicated in connection with Crime
No.221/2020, registered at Police Station Jeeran, District Neemuch for
offence punishable under Sections 8/15, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.
3. As per the prosecution, on receipt of a secret information on 21.9.2020
total 240 Kgs of contraband was recovered from the applicant which was
being transported by him in his tempo bearing registration No. M.P. 14 GC
1769. On the basis of recovery made from the applicant he had been
implicated and arrested in the present offence.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that till date no witness has
been examined before the trial court though there are 14 witnesses to be
examined on part of the prosecution. Applicant is in custody for about 3 years
hence it is apparent that trial shall take a long time for its conclusion. Along
with the charge sheet FSL report has also not been filed to confirm the fact
that the articles seized from the possession of the applicant is a contraband.
Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of
Dheeraj Kumar Shukla vs. State of U.P. (SLP Criminal No.6690/2022
decided on 25.1.2023) in which considering the period of detention of 2 ½
years in the matter of commercial quantity and the delay in trial, bail has been
granted. It is further submitted that the applicant is not having any criminal
antecedents and he is permanent resident of district Neemuch hence there is no
question of him absconding. On such grounds, prayer for grant of bail to the
applicant has been made.
5. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel for the
non-applicant/State submitting that in view of the allegation levelled against
the applicant, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case
diary.
7. The applicant is in custody for about 2 years and 11 months and as of
now no witness has been examined before the trial court though there are 14
witnesses to be examined. The trial is hence likely to take time for its
conclusion. Along with charge sheet, no FSL report has been filed to confirm
that the article recovered from the applicant is a contraband. Thus in my
opinion, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant
deserves to be released on bail.
8. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the
application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be
released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-
with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court
for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition
that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall
also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973.
9. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of
bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE
SS/-
Digitally signed by SHAILESH
MAHADEV SUKHDEVE
Date: 2023.08.21 10:32:55
+05'30'
