Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Pappi Singh vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 24 May, 2023
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2023/RJJD/017093]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 5234/2023
Pappi Singh S/o Gurjant Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ward
No. 06, Lambidab, P.s. Sangria, Tehsil Sangria, District
Hanumangarh. (Presently Lodged At District Jail, Hanumangarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anita Gehlot, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
24/05/2023
The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR
No.322/2021 of Police Station Sangria, District Hanumangarh for
the offence punishable under Sections 8/22, 29 of NDPS Act. He
has preferred this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The first bail application was dismissed as not pressed on
23.03.2022 with liberty to file afresh after recording the statement
of Seizure Officer / Investigating Officer.
After recording of the statement of Seizure Officer /
Investigating Officer, the petitioner filed second bail application,
which was also dismissed as not pressed on 04.01.2023.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that after rejection of the
second bail application, only statement of Sanjay (PW-3) has been
recorded before the trial court, who was a member of Seizure
Team. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is inside the jail
since 28.06.2021 and the trial of the case will take sufficient long
time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be
[2023/RJJD/017093] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-5234/2023]
granted to the accused-petitioner. Counsel has relied upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohd.
Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (SC) Law Finder
Doc Id # 2174265.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the third bail
application.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
The recovered contraband is more than commercial quantity
and the same was recovered from the possession of co-accused
Gagandeep and Avinash. There is call details available on record
between the main accused Gagandeep and the present petitioner.
This fact has also been fortified by the Seizure Officer /
Investigating Officer in his statement.
There is no change of circumstances except the recording of
statement of Sanjay (PW-3), who was a member of Seizure Team.
So far as the judgment relied by the petitioner in the case of
Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain (supra) is concerned, the same is
altogether different from the present case. In the cited judgment,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court had granted indulgene of bail to the
accused considering the fact that he was inside the jail for more
than seven years, whereas in the present case the petitioner is
inside the jail for about for two years.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court in not
inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.
Hence, the third bail application is rejected.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
118-MS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
