Rajasthan High Court
Ramprasad S/O Madanlal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 31 October, 2023
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2023:RJ-JP:31974]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13791/2023
Ramprasad S/o Madanlal, R/o Moikalan Police Station Bhalta
District Jhalawar (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Sub District Jail,
Aklera District Jhalawar (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Khandelwal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
31/10/2023
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439
of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in
connection with FIR No.284/2023 registered at Police Station
Ghantoli, District Jhalawar for the offences under Sections 8/21 &
29 of NDPS Act.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He
further submits that petitioner has been made accused in this case
solely on the basis of interrogation of co-accused - Ram Lal, who
was found in possession of 150g smack. No recovery has been
affected from the possession of the petitioner. He also submits
that interrogation of the co-accused cannot be used against the
petitioner as the same is inadmissible in evidence in view of
provisions of Section 25 of the Evidence Act. Learned counsel has
[2023:RJ-JP:31974] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13791/2023]
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. There are no previous criminal antecedents
of the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2023.
and trial of the case will take considerable time. He also contends
that further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful
purpose.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
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 facts that no recovery has
been affected from the possession of the petitioner and he has
been made accused in this case solely on the basis of
interrogation of co-accused- Ram Lal, who was found in
possession of contraband, there are no previous criminal
antecedents of the petitioner and so also keeping in view the law
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tofan
Singh (supra), but without commenting anything on the
merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail
application.
6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed
that accused-petitioner - Ramprasad S/o Madanlal shall be
released on bail provided he 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
[2023:RJ-JP:31974] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13791/2023]
stipulation that he 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 petitioner shall not involve
in similar offence(s) during pendency of bail granted by this Court.
If breach of this condition 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 petitioner by this Court.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
237-Nirmala
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
