Anand Singh S/O Shri Dayal Singh vs Union Of India(Directorate Of ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2163 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Fourth Bail Application No.
                               15143/2020

Anand Singh S/o Shri Dayal Singh, R/o 126 Mitra Nagar Khirni
Phatak Jhotwara Jaipur Raj. (Presently Confined In Central Jail
Jaipur)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
Union Of India(Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence), Through
Special Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Anil Kumar Upman
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Anand Sharma



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

                          Judgment / Order

05/03/2021

1. Petitioner has filed this fourth bail application under Section

439 Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.10/2019 (DRI/DZU/JRV/19/Int-10/2019) was

registered at Police Station Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,

Regional Unit, Jaipur for offence under Section 8 R/w and Sections

23, 22, 29 of NDPS Act.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the DRI

team conducted a raid at 176-B Khatipura Jaipur, a house

belonging to Jagdish Singh retired Captain, at 4.00 pm on

22.10.2019. It is also contended that as per the statement of

Jagdish Singh, he had given one room on rent to Bhagwan Sain on

10.09.2019 and at the time when the raid was conducted, no one

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-15143/2020]

was present. As per the prosecution version, one Ashok

Khandelwal was also present in the room which was taken on rent

by Bhagwan Sain. It is further contended that petitioner was

picked from his house at around 6:00 pm on 22.10.2019. A

complaint in this regard was made by wife of the petitioner to the

police authorities on 23.10.2019 at 00:16 am. It is contended that

as per the charge-sheet, one Kanishk Sharma and Bhagwan Sain

were transporting medicines to United States of America and the

recovery was also effected from the co-accused. No recovery was

effected from the present petitioner. Girraj Narwal and Kanishk

Sharma have been enlarged on bail.

4. Counsel for the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence has

opposed the fourth bail application. It is contended that

petitioner's mobile was kept on surveillance and he was found to

be in constant communication with the co-accused in this case.

Petitioner was also involved in the transportation of drugs from

India to United States of America and he was the mastermind.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the

petitioner, I deem it proper to allow the fourth bail application.

7. This fourth bail application is, accordingly, allowed and it is

directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided

he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees

One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction

of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before

that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-15143/2020]

all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do

so.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

NIKHIL KR. YADAV /9

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)