Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mahesh vs State Of Rajasthan on 10 March, 2021
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3384/2021
Mahesh S/o Narayan Lal Prajapat, Aged About 27 Years, Pipli
Acharyan, P.s. Kankroli, District Rajsamand. (Presently Confined
At District Jail Rajsamand).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2957/2021
1 Rajmal @ Raju S/o Shri Mangilal, Aged About 33 Years,
. Tejpura Police Station Kankroli, District Rajsamand. (At
Present Lodged In District Jail Rajsamand).
2 Chandmal S/o Shri Kishanlal, Aged About 42 Years, Tejpura
. Police Station Kankroli, District Rajsamand. (At Present
Lodged In District Jail Rajsamand).
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2958/2021
Pema Ram S/o Rata Lal, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Keshavnagr,
Pipali Acharyan, Police Station Kankroli District Rajsamand. (At
Present Lodged In District Jail, Rajsamand).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2959/2021
Kishanlal S/o Shri Mangilal, Aged About 27 Years, Banjara Basti,
Tejpura, Police Station Kankroli, District Rajsamand. (At Present
Lodged In District Jail Rajsamand).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
(2 of 4) [CRLMB-3384/2021]
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2960/2021
Chandu S/o Bihari, Aged About 37 Years, Bhamakheda, Chtraji
Ka Kheda, Police Station Relmagra, District Rajsamand. (At
Present Lodged In District Jail, Rajsamand).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Saruparia
Mr. Chandrasen Rathore
Mr. Vikram Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Order
10/03/2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned
Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.
The petitioners have been arrested in FIR No.12/2019 of
Police Station Kelwa, District Rajsamand for the offences
punishable under Sections 8/15, 8/18 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act.
They have preferred these bail applications under Section 439
Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that as
per the prosecution story, the police have recovered 100 gms. of
opium and 70 kgs. of poppy strw from the Bolero Car and 60 kgs.
of poppy straw from the Eco-Maruti Suzuki Car. It is alleged that
petitioners Rajmal and Chandu were in the Bolero Car whereas,
peititoners Mahesh and Pema Ram were in the Eco-Maruti Suzuki
Car. It is also submitted that allegation against the petitioner
(3 of 4) [CRLMB-3384/2021]
Kishan lal is to the effect that he has supplied the said narcotic
contraband to the other petitioners. Learned counsels for the
petitioners have invited my attention towards the recovery memo
and argued that as per the recovery memo, prepared by the
police, five bags containing poppy straw weighing 70 kgs. were
recovered from the Bolero Car whereas, four bags containing
poppy straw weighing 60 kgs. were recovered from the Eco-Maruti
Suzuki Car. It is submitted that the Seizure Officer has not taken
out separte samples form the each bag filled with poppy straw but
has taken out 500 gms. of samples from each bag and thereafter
mixed it and taken out sample. Learned counsel for the petiitoners
have also invited my attention towards the statements of PW-1
Seizure Officer, who in his statements has also stated that he has
taken out 500 gms. of poppy straw from each bag and after
mixing the same taken out the sample. Thus, it is clear that the
Seizure Officer did not collect separate samples from each bag. It
is also submitted that the I.O. has not stated that the test by the
U.N. Kit was carried out on each bag before taking small quantity
of poppy husk for samples.
Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance on
the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Netram Vs.
State of Rajasthan, reported in 2014(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163
has argued that this Court has held that if the samples from each
bag containing poppy husk/poppy straw have not been collected
and test by U.N.Kit has not been conducted on each bag and if the
Seizure Officer has taken out some quantity of narcotic drug from
each bag and after mixing the same has taken out some portion
for sample, then, the same is not in conformity with the Standing
Instruction No.1/88 issued by the Narcotics Control Bureau, New
(4 of 4) [CRLMB-3384/2021]
Delhi, particularly, Instruction No.1.7 and, as such, it cannot be
said that the narcotic contraband recovered in the matter is of
commercial quantity or above. It is, thus, prayed that the
petitioners may kindly be enlarged on bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail applications.
Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, substantial grounds taken in this bail application, taking into
consideration the judgment passed by this Court in Netram's
case (supra) and keeping in view the fact that trial of the case is
likely to take time, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
Accordingly, these bail applications filed under Section 439
Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is directed that petitioners Mahesh S/o
Narayan Lal Prajapat, Rajmal @ Raju S/o Shri Mangilal, Chandmal
S/o Shri Kishanlal, Pema Ram S/o Rata Lal, Kishanlal S/o Shri
Mangilal and Chandu S/o Bihari shall be released on bail in
connection with FIR No.12/2019 of Police Station Kelwa, District
Rajsamand provided he executes 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 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
56-Taruna/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
