Dhanna Ram vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3178 Raj

[2023/RJJD/010676]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2534/2023

Dhanna Ram S/o Sh. Sugnaram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o

Chitana P.s. Panchu Dist. Bikaner.

(Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail, Bikaner).

                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)           : Mr.Ramniwas.
For Respondent-State        : Mr.Sumer Singh Rajpurohit.
With                        : Mr.Ishwar Singh, Seizure Officer



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

                                     Order

18/04/2023

This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been

filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with

FIR No.80/2019 registered at Police Station Mahajan, District

Bikaner, for offences under Sections 8/15, 25 and 8/29 of the

N.D.P.S. Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner invited the Court's

attention towards the statement and cross examination of the

Seizure Officer namely Ishwar Singh (P.W.1) and submitted that

the Seizure Officer (P.W.1) had recovered the contraband from five

sacs and had taken sample after mixing the recovered contraband.

[2023/RJJD/010676] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2534/2023]

Learned counsel submitted that the action of the Seizure Officer is

in violation to the Standing Order No.1/88 dated 15.3.1988 of the

N.C.B. New Delhi and the judgment rendered by this Court in the

case of Netram Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2014(1)

Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163. Learned counsel submitted that in view of the

admitted case that the contraband recovered from various sacs,

was not properly weighed and mixed in one bag/packet, the

petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor and Ishwar Singh (Seizure Officer)

were not in a position to refute the aforesaid argument with

regard to mixing of the contraband recovered from five sacs but

submitted that keeping in view the nature of offence, the

petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and

circumstances of the case so also the statement of Seizure Officer

(P.W.1), it is prima-facie established that the Seizure Officer

(P.W.1) has not acted in conformity with the Standing Order

No.1/88 dated 15.3.1988 of N.C.B. New Delhi and the judgment

rendered by this Court in the case of Netram (supra). The rigors of

Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act are duly satisfied, hence, without

expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this

Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is

allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Dhanna

Ram S/o Sh. Sugnaram shall be enlarged on bail in connection

with FIR No.80/2019 registered at Police Station Mahajan, District

Bikaner, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of

[2023/RJJD/010676] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2534/2023]

Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- 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.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

/tarun goyal/

Sr.No.67

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)