Rajasthan High Court
Jagdish Prasad S/O Mangejaram vs State Of Rajasthan on 20 May, 2022
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2942/2022
Jagdish Prasad S/o Mangejaram, R/o Gadoda Ps Nechwa Distt.
Sikar At Present R/o Hathi Teeba Bagichi Salasar Bus Stand Ward
No. 21 Sikar Ps Kotwali Sikar Distt. Sikar (At Present Confined In
Dist. Jail Sikar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7411/2022
Vijay Kumar Son Of Shrichand, Aged About 35 Years, Resident
Of Gothda Bhookran Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar, At
Present Residing At Quarter No. 55, Near Nehru Park, Shastri
Nagar, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj.) ( At Present Confined
In District Jail Sikar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Upman.
Mr. R.S. Gurjar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
20/05/2022
1. The instant bail applications have been filed by the
petitioners Jagdish Prasad S/o Mangejaram and Vijay Kumar Son
Of Shrichand under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioners have been
arrested in connection with FIR No. 62/2021 registered at Police
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-2942/2022]
Station Nechawa, Sikar for the offence(s) under Sections 8 and 20
of NDPS Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is admittedly
case of the prosecution that there were 127 packets. The individual
weight of packet has not been taken rather all packets were taken in
common container and the total weight of the contraband ganja has
been shown to be 263.750 Kgs. A sample of 100 gram ganja was taken
from mixed/intermingled substance. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court
in the case of Netram vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2014 91)
Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163 has propounded that if separate sample is not taken
from each packet and the content of all the packets are taken together
and the sample is taken from the cumulatively taken contraband then it
cannot be said that every packet was having contraband. Learned
counsel submits that it cannot be said with certainty that every packet
was having contraband in it. The possibility that one packet was having
contraband and the others were having neutral substance cannot be
ruled out. He further submits that as per standing notification No.1/88
issued by the Central Bureau of Narcotics, it was incumbent upon the
Seizing Officer to collect separate sample from each packet thus
recovery has been effected dehors method directed by the Agency.
Netram's judgment has been followed subsequently in hundreds of
cases by this Court. Since, it cannot be ascertained and it might be one
kg. Or two kgs. which is well below the commercial quantity, therefore,
embargo is contained under Section 37 NDPS Act would not be
attracted.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail
applications.
4. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the
parties and looking to the possibility that the trial may take long time to
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-2942/2022]
conclude, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners
on bail.
5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is
allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners shall be enlarged
on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of
the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on
all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.
(FARJAND ALI),J
PREETI VALECHA /22-23
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
