Satyam Shukla vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 683 MP

                                                              1
                           IN      THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                    BEFORE
                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                ON THE 11 th OF JANUARY, 2023
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 58194 of 2022

                          BETWEEN:-
                          SATYAM SHUKLA S/O SHRI SANJAY SHUKLA, AGED
                          ABOUT    19  YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT R/O
                          VILLAGE DURAON, POLICE STATION AMILIYA,
                          DISTRICT SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....APPLICANT
                          (BY SHRI RAKESH DWIVEDI -ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH TRHOUGH STATION
                          HOUSE OFFICER P.S. BARGAWAN DISTRICT SINGRAULI
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI DILIP SHRIVASTAVA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                 This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                               ORDER

These are first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, filed by the applicant for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 754/2022 registered at Police Station-Bargawan, District-Singrauli (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 8/21 & 22 of the Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 and Section 5/13of M.P. Drug Control Act. The applicant is in jail since 02.11.2022.

As per prosecution story, on the basis of information received from an Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 1/13/2023 6:38:35 PM

informant that applicant was transporting ONEREX Cough Syrup by vehicle bearing registration No.CG-04-HG/5340 Police officials stopped the vehicle. The applicant has been caught red handed with 120 bottles of Onerex Syrup containing 100 ml of each bottle. Thereafter, the police has registered the aforesaid offence against the applicant and other-accused.

Learned counsel for the applicant-accused submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that there is violation of Section 50 of NDPS Act and assails conjoint notice given to the applicant and other co-accused. Learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan Vs.

Permanand and another (2014) 5 SCC 345. Charge-sheet has been filed. Conclusion of trial will take time. On these grounds, learned counsel for applicant prays for grant of bail.

Per-contra, learned Panel Lawyer opposes the bail application submitting that the applicant was transporting the contraband which is fall under the commercial quantity, hence there is a bar under Section 37 of NDPS Act. He place reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of in the case of Hira Singh and another Vs. Union of India and another, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 382.

I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the record. From the face of record, it is clear that commercial quantity of contraband has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and co- accused. So far as issue of conjoint notice under Section 50 of NDPS Act is concerned. In the case of NCB Chennai, vs. R. Paulsamy, (2000) 9 SCC 459 and Union of India vs. Ram Sumujh and Another (1999) 9 SCC 429, It has been held by the Apex Court that the procedural irregularity etc, if any Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 1/13/2023 6:38:35 PM

can not be looked into at the time of grant of bail.This position has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Union of India vs. Md. Nawas Khan, 2021 (10) SCC 100 and held that when the issue is as to whether the procedure laid down under the NDPS act is complied or not, the same cannot be looked into at the time of grant of bail and can only be decided at the time of trial, as the same is question of fact.

Hence, in view of the aforesaid settled position of law and the commercial quantity so involved in the present matter, this Court cannot evaluate the evidence on record while exercising the discretion under Section 439 of Cr.P.C, therefore, no case for bail is made out.

The application stands rejected.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE MISHRA

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Signing time: 1/13/2023 6:38:35 PM