Siyaram vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 14261 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10217/2022

Siyaram S/o Shri Mangalram, Aged About 42 Years, B/c Jat R/o Kurdaya Tehsil And Ps Medtacity Dist. Nagaur Raj. (Appellant/ Accused Is In Sub Jail Sub Jail Medtacity)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. BL Dudy For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Judgment / Order

05/12/2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the

learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on

record.

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 151/2019 of

Police Station Merta City, District Nagaur for the offences

punishable under Sections 8/15, 18,25 of NDPS Act. He has

preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

As per the prosecution story, the police arrested the

petitioner while he was transporting 3.50 gms opium milk, 2.900

kgs opium biscuits and 8 kgs poppy straw.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner was arrested on 25.04.2019 and till date, out of

nineteen prosecution witnesses only, six have been examined

before the trial court and taking into consideration this fact, the

petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-10217/2022]

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail

application and submitted that the petitioner is indulged in

smuggling of narcotic substance. It is argued that taking into

consideration the narcotic drugs seized from the possession of the

petitioner such as opium milk, opium biscuits and poppy straw, it

is clear that he is involved in trading of narcotic substances.

Learned Public Prosecutor has also submitted that the statement

of Seizure Officer has already been recorded before the trial court,

from which, it is clear that the narcotic substance above

commercial quantity has been recovered from the conscious

possession of the petitioner and the prosecution has also collected

evidence to the effect that he is involved in trading of narcotic

substance. It is further submitted that taking into consideration

the limitation of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioner is not

entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This is seventh bail application filed on behalf of the

petitioner after his arrest. The first bail application of the

petitioner has dismissed while granting him liberty to file a fresh

bail application before the trial court after filing of charge-sheet.

The second bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on

29.08.2019 rejecting the contention made by learned counsel for

the petitioner that charge-sheet has not been filed against him

within 90 days. The third bail application of the petitioner again

came to be dismissed as not pressed on 06.11.2019. The fourth

bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as not pressed on

21.01.2020 while granting him liberty to file a fresh bail

application before the trial court after recording of the statement

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-10217/2022]

of the Investigating Officer/Seizure Officer. Again, the fifth bail

application of the petitioner was dismissed as not pressed on

04.05.2021. The sixth bail application of the petitioner was also

dismissed as not pressed on 06.07.2022. Now, this is the seventh

bail application preferred on behalf of the petitioner.

It is also to be noted that the earlier bail applications were

preferred on behalf of the petitioner by different advocates and

now the present one through a new counsel.

Be that as it may, I have gone though the charge-sheet as

well as the material available on record and the evidence of the

Seizure Officer.

Huge quantity of narcotic contraband such as opium milk,

opium biscuits and poppy straw have been recovered from the

conscious possession of the petitioner. The Seizure Officer, is his

court statement, has verified the said seizure from the possession

of the petitioner and the defence has failed to shake the testimony

of the Seizure Officer.

Taking into consideration the fact that since huge quantity of

narcotic contraband have been recovered from the conscious

possession of the petitioner, it can be presumed that he is

involved in trading of narcotic substances.

Keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the

case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Hence, this seventh bail application preferred by the

petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J SURABHII/404-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)