Harish Chand Chanchalani S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 6167 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

 S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 5th Bail Application No. 13822/2022

Harish Chand Chanchalani S/o Shri Khushi Ram, Aged About 67
Years, R/o A-381, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Presently Lodged In
Central Jail, Jaipur).
                                                                  ----Applicant
                                   Versus


State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
                                                                ----Respondent

For Applicant(s)          :    Mr. Sudhir Jain
For Respondent(s)         :    Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP


          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

                                    Order

14/09/2022

1. Applicant has filed this fifth bail application under Section

439 of Cr.P.C. on the ground of his medical condition.

2. F.I.R. No. 531/2017 registered at Police Station Malviya

Nagar, Jaipur for offence under Sections 8/21 & 8/22 of NDPS Act.

3. It is contended by counsel for the applicant that he is not

arguing the present bail application on merits rather he has filed

this bail application only on the medical ground.

4. Counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the following

judgments:-

(i) Subhash Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh (H.P.)

2019(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 81, decided by Himachal Pradesh High

Court dated 14.11.2018;

(ii) V.K. Ebrahim Kunju v. State of Kerala, (Kerala), (Bail

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-13822/2022]

Application No.100 of 2021) (Crime No.1 of 2019 Of Vacb,

Ernakulam), decided by Kerala High Court dated 08.01.2021;

(iii) Gurjant Singh v. State of Punjab, (Punjab and Haryana)

2019(1) Law Herald 452, decided by Punjab and Haryana High

Court dated 19.11.2018;

(iv) Amar Singh v. State 2013(6) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1197,

decided by Delhi High Court dated 24.10.2011.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the fifth bail application.

It is contended that applicant is involved in cases pertaining to

commercial quantity of drugs and his earlier bail application was

dismissed on merits and he has also not got any relief from the Apex

Court.

6. I have considered the contentions.

7. In an earlier matter, the applicant was involved in cases

pertaining to commercial quantity of drugs which contained 35 lakh

injections and in the present case also, the commercial quantity of

drugs have been recovered from the applicant.

8. This Court had earlier granted interim bail to the applicant on

the medical grounds and the same was extended and applicant has

remained on interim bail for a period of about seven months.

Subsequently, an application for extension of interim bail was

rejected vide order dated 31.08.2022 and it was observed that

applicant can be looked into at jail as there are medical facilities and

Doctors available round the clock. Accused was permitted to take

BIPAP Machine in jail and Jail Doctors were directed to operate the

said machine as per requirement of the applicant.

9. The judgments cited by counsel for the applicant do not apply

to the facts of the present case, as the present accused is found

involved in two cases pertaining to commercial quantity and the bar

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-13822/2022]

under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is applicable.

10. Considering the above, I am not inclined to entertain the

present fifth bail application on the ground of medical condition.

11. Accordingly, the fifth bail application is rejected.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

AMIT/45

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)