Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mukesh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 7 July, 2021
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3949/2021
Mukesh Kumar S/o Sh. Padmaram, Aged About 32 Years, B/c
Bhargav, R/o Behind Sadar Police Station, Bhargav Colony,
Barmer, Dist. Barmer. (Presently Incarcerated In Sub Jail,
Suratgarh, Dist. Ganganagar).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Salim
For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Rajpurohit, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
07/07/2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.
The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.34/2020 of Police
Station Suratgarh Sahar District Sri Ganganagar for the offences
punishable under Sections 8/22, 29 of NDPS Act. He has preferred
this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per
the prosecution story, the police have apprehended co-accused
Shankar Lal, Mahadev and Ganga Ram while they were carrying
tablets/capsules containing narcotic substance Tramadol above
commercial quantity. It is also submitted that as per the charge-
sheet, during the course of investigation the above named co-
accused persons while in police custody had supplied information
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-3949/2021]
to the police that they procured the said narcotic substance from
the co-accused Govind. The police thereafter arrested Govind, who
while in police custody informed the police that he has procured
narcotic substance from the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that solely on
the basis of the said information the police arrested the petitioner
and filed charge-sheet against him for the offences punishable
under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act. It is also submitted that it is
well settled law that any information supplied by a co-accused
person while in police custody is not admissible in evidence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also invited my attention
towards the statements of Investigating Officer PW-1 Suresh
Kumar and has argued that from his evidence, it is clear that he
has failed to point out any incriminating evidence concluding
involvement of the petitioner in commission of crime. It is further
submitted that in such circumstances, it is clear that the petitioner
has falsely been implicated in this case.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances
of the case and after going through the charge-sheet as well as
the evidence of the Investigating Officer PW-1 Suresh Kumar
wherein, he has admitted that evidence regarding connection
between the petitioner and the other co-accused Govind was
collected by him but he has not stated that the evidence regarding
his link between the persons from whom the narcotic contraband
has been recovered is available on record, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to
grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-3949/2021]
Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439
Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Mukesh Kumar
S/o Sh. Padmaram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR
No.34/2020 of Police Station Suratgarh Sahar, District Sri
Ganganagar provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of
Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/-
each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance
before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever
called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
Surabhii/90-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
