Banshi Lal vs State
2021 Latest Caselaw 6856 Raj

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6856 Raj
Judgement Date : 9 March, 2021

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Banshi Lal vs State on 9 March, 2021

Bench: Vijay Bishnoi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2920/2020

1. Banshi Lal S/o Shri Bhera Suthar, Aged About 75 Years, By Caste Suthar, R/o Goraji Ka Nimbahera, Kapasan Police Station, District Chittorgarh.

2. Onkar S/o Laxman Pareek, Aged About 65 Years, By Caste Brahmin, R/o Goraji Ka Nimbahera, Kapasan Police Station, District Chittorgarh.

3. Naru S/o Ratta Bhaeel, Aged About 45 Years, By Caste Bheel, R/o Goraji Ka Nimbahera, Kapasan Police Station, District Chittorgarh.

4. Dalla S/o Ratta Bheel, Aged About 43 Years, By Caste Bheel, R/o Goraji Ka Nimbahera, Kapasan Police Station, District Chittorgarh.

5. Mangu Khan S/o Iamam Bux, Aged About 36 Years, By Caste Muslim, R/o Goraji Ka Nimbahera, Kapasan Police Station, District Chittorgarh.

----Petitioners Versus

State, Through P.p.

----Respondent

Connected With

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3756/2020

Smt. Fefi Bai W/o Bheru Lal, Aged About 66 Years, By Caste Kumahar, R/o Goraji Ka Nimbahera, Kapasan Police Station, District Chittorgarh.

----Petitioner Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

                                                                ----Respondent



                                      (2 of 4)                    [CRLMB-2920/2020]




For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. S.S. Shaktawat, Mr. BPS Inda

For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Mohd. Javed Gauri, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

09/03/2021

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

the material available on record.

The petitioner(s) apprehend(s) his/her/their arrest in

connection with FIR No.98/2019 of Police Station

Kapasan, Distt. Chittorgarh for the offence(s) punishable

under Section(s) 8/15, 8/18 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act

and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted

that allegation against the petitioners is to the effect that

they stored opium in the house of co-accused Chagan Lal

without informing the concerned officer and without there

being any rent deed executed for the same. It is also

submitted that the petitioners are license holders of

opium and even it is assumed that they stored it in the

house of co-accused Chagan Lal without informing the

concerned officer, then also, it can be termed as an

irregularity and not any offence under the NDPS Act. It is

also submitted that the petitioners have already joined

the investigation and they have been interrogated by the

I.O, therefore, there is no requirement of their custodial

(3 of 4) [CRLMB-2920/2020]

interrogation. It is, thus, prayed that the petitioners may

be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed

the bail applications.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and

circumstances of the case; after going through the case

diary, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the

case, I deem it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail

to the accused petitioner(s) under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, this/these bail application(s) under

Section 438 Cr.P.C. is/are allowed and it is directed that

in the event of arrest of petitioner(s) - Banshi Lal S/o

Shri Bhera Suthar, Onkar S/o Laxman Pareek, Naru S/o

Ratta Bhaeel, Dalla S/o Ratta Bheel, Mangu Khan S/o Iamam Bux and Smt. Fefi Bai W/o Bheru Lal in

connection with FIR No.98/2019 of Police Station

Kapasan, Distt. Chittorgarh, he/she/they shall be

enlarged on bail provided he/she/they furnishes 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 the concerned I.O./S.H.O. on the following

conditions:-

(i) that the petitioner(s) shall make himself/herself/themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) that the petitioner(s) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from

(4 of 4) [CRLMB-2920/2020]

disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; and