Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vikram Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 March, 2021
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 8th Bail Application No. 2698/2021
Vikram Singh S/o Suryapal Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Rajakheri, P.s. Y.d. Nagar, Dist. Mandsaur (M.p.). (At Present
Lodged At Sub Jail, Sujangarh).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 2699/2021
Pappu Dangi S/o Bhuwan Ji, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Paduni,
P.s. Arnod, Dist. Pratapgarh. (At Present Lodged At Sub Jail,
Sujangarh).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
05/03/2021
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the material available on record.
The petitioner(s) has/have been arrested in FIR
No.35/2015 of Police Station Chapar, District Churu for
the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 8/15, 25 and
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-2698/2021]
29 of the NDPS Act. He/she/they has/have preferred
this/these bail application(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this
case. It is argued that as per the prosecution story, huge
quantity of poppy straw was recovered from two co-
accused persons namely Chandrapal Singh and Dinesh
Singh while they were transporting the same in a truck.
It is alleged that the petitioners were escorting the said
truck and they were apprehended by the police after
several hours of recovery of the narcotic contraband. The
police have alleged that petitioners - Pappu Dangi and
Vikram Singh were in regular touch with co-accused
Chandrapal Singh on telephone, however, the I.O.
Ranveer Singh (PW-3), in his court statements, has
specifically admitted that during the course of
investigation, he has failed to collect evidence of this
effect that there was any conversation on telephone
between petitioner - Vikram Singh and co-accused
Chandrapal Singh. The I.O. though has stated that
evidence of this effect is available on record that co-
accused Chandrapal Singh had conversation on telephone
with petitioner - Pappu Dangi, however later on, he has
admitted that no such call detail is available on record
and the certificate under Section 65-B of the I.T. Act is
also not available on record. Learned counsel for the
petitioners has argued that from the above piece of
evidence, it is clear that the prosecution has failed to
establish any connection of the petitioners with the co-
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-2698/2021]
accused persons, from whom huge quantity of narcotic
contraband was recovered. It is submitted that the
petitioners are in custody from 28.5.2015 and even after
completion of five years, trial of the case has not been
concluded. It is, thus, prayed that the petitioners may be
enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed
the bail applications.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and
proper to grant bail to the petitioner(s) under Section
439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this/these bail application(s) filed under
Section 439 Cr.P.C. is/are allowed and it is directed that
petitioner(s) - Vikram Singh S/o Suryapal Singh and
Pappu Dangi S/o Bhuwan Ji shall be released on bail in
connection with FIR No.35/2015 of Police Station Chapar,
District Churu provided he/she/they execute(s) a
personal bond in the 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/her/their
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
36 - 37 ms rathore
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
