Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sukha Ram @ Sukhdev vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 May, 2021
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4420/2021
Sukha Ram @ Sukhdev S/o Sona Ram, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Rabasar, Tehsil And Police Station Chotan, Dist. Barmer.
(Presently Lodged At District Jail, Barmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Karwasra (through VC)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gauri, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
05/05/2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner through VC as well
as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on
record.
The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.348/2020 of
Police Station Chotan District Barmer 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 as per the
prosecution story, huge quantity of tablets containing narcotic
substance tramadol have been recovered from the co-accused
Raju Ram on 10.11.2020. It is submitted that in the charge-sheet,
the police have concluded that the said narcotic contraband was
supplied to co-accused Raju Ram by the petitioner. It is submitted
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-4420/2021]
that from a bare perusal of the charge-sheet, it is clear that no
such information of this effect was given to the police by co-
accused Raju Ram and the police have filed charge-sheet against
the petitioner only on the basis of the information supplied by the
petitioner himself to the effect that he has supplied the said
narcotic contraband to the co-accused. It is submitted that the
petitioner has not supplied any such narcotic contraband to the
co-accused Raju Ram and the police have failed to collect any
evidence to prove that the petitioner was in any manner in contact
with the said co-accused prior or on the date of the incident.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention
towards the statements of Investigating Officer (PW-1) and has
argued that from the said evidence of the Investigating Officer, it
is clear that there is no evidence available on record against the
petitioner except the information given by him under Section 27 of
the Indian Evidence Act while in police custody informing that he
has supplied the narcotic contraband to the co-accused Raju Ram
at his place. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
it is well settled that any information supplied by an accused
person while in police custody is not a good piece of evidence.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
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 accused
petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439
Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Sukha Ram @
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-4420/2021]
Sukhdev S/o Sona Ram shall be released on bail in connection
with FIR No.348/2020 of Police Station Chotan District Barmer
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/18-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
