Ashok Kumar Dhakar S/O Shree Debi ... vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6505 Raj/2

[2023:RJ-JP:33150]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR
     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10669/2023

Prakash S/o Devi Lal, R/o Village Purani Umar, Tehsil Singholi,
Dist. Neemach (M.p.) (Presently Confined To Central Jail Bundi)
                                                    ----Petitioner
                             Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Pp
                                                  ----Respondent

Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12456/2023 Ashok Kumar Dhakar S/o Shree Debi Lal, R/o Hathipura, Police Station Ratangarh, Post Umar, Tehsil Singochi, District Neemach, Madhya Pradesh. (Presently Confined In Central Jail Bundi)

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

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Pareek Mr. Mohd. Shakir Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Mahala, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

04/11/2023

1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 439 of

Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in

connection with FIR No.84/2022 registered at Police Station Dabi,

District Bundi for the offence under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act.

Later on, the police filed the chargesheet in this matter for the

offences under Sections 8/15, 8/25 & 8/29 of NDPS Act.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that

the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case.

He further submits that co-accused - Shawan and Vinod were

found in possession of the contraband. No recovery has been

[2023:RJ-JP:33150] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10669/2023]

affected from the possession of the petitioners. He submits that

petitioners have been made accused in this case solely on the

basis of interrogation of the co-accused persons, which cannot be

used against the petitioners as the same is inadmissible in

evidence in view of provisions of Section 25 of the Evidence Act.

Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment rendered by

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan Singh Vs. State of

Tamil Nadu reported in AIR 2020 SC 5592. Co-accused-

Narayan Singh Hada, who is the owner of the godown and Ashok

Dubey have been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this

Court. The petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and

chargesheet has been filed and trial of the case will take

considerable time. He also contends that further custody of the

petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail applications and

submits co-accused - Vinod & Shawan have been found in

possession of contraband, which is of commercial quantity, thus,

considering the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot

be granted to the petitioners.

4. I have considered the contentions.

5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that no recovery has

been affected from the possession of the petitioners, other co-

accused persons namely- Narayan Singh Hada & Ashok Dubey

have been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and

looking to the custody period of the petitioners, but without

[2023:RJ-JP:33150] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10669/2023]

commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem

it proper to allow the bail applications.

6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is

directed that accused-petitioners - (1) Prakash S/o Devi Lal,

R/o Village Purani Umar (2) Ashok Kumar Dhakar S/o

Shree Debi Lal shall be released on bail provided each of them

furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the

satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that they

shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter

is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when

called upon to do so.

7. However, it is made clear that the petitioners shall not

involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this

Court. The petitioners are further directed to mark their presence

in the concerned police station on first Monday, once in three

months, till trial is concluded. If breach of any of these conditions

is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall

alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to

petitioners by this Court.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

22-23-Nirmala/Deepa

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)