Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Teja Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:23572) on 23 May, 2024
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2024:RJ-JD:23572]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6290/2024
Teja Ram S/o Babu Lal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village
Pundalu, P.s. Gotan, Dist. Nagaour, Raj. (At Present Lodged In
Sub Jail, Jaitaran)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
23/05/2024
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of
filing the instant application under Section 439 CrPC at the
instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter
are tabulated herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case
2. Concerned Police Station Sendra
3. District Pali
4. Offences alleged in the FIR Section 8/15 of the NDPS
Act
5. Offences added, if any Sections 467, 468 & 471
of the IPC
6. Date of passing of impugned 05.04.2024
order
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 12.02.2022
SHO Manoj Kumar and his team during nakabandi intercepted a
Car being registration No.RJ06-CD-2968. The driver Rameshwar
[2024:RJ-JD:23572] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-6290/2024]
Lal and present petitioner Teja Ram tried to escape good but
failed to do so. They were interrogated by the SHO whereupon
they disclosed their names to be Rameshwar and Tejaram. During
search of the vehicle, poppy husk weighing 89.500 Kg (in two
gunny bags) was recovered from their possession. Whereafter, the
accused were taken into custody. The Seizing Officer took samples
at the spot and marked them as 'S-1' TO 'S-2' from the recovered
contraband and sent the same to the FSL for its chemical
examination. After usual investigation, a case under Section 8/15
of the NDPS Act has been filed.
3. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no
case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his
incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the
case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-
petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures
and surmises. He further submits that the accused was taken into
custody on 12.02.2022 and since then he is behind the bars. Co-
accused Suresh Kala and Rameshwar have been enlarged on bail
by this Court vide order dated 20.03.2024 and 16.05.2024 passed
in SBCRLM 4th Bail Application Nos.773/2024 & 4040/2024 and
case of the petitioner is in no manner distinguishable from them.
It is further stated that the trial is not going to be culminated and
out of total 27 witnesses only three could have been examined,
still it seems that a further long time shall be taken in conclusion
of the trial, thus, he may be enlarged on bail.
4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application
[2024:RJ-JD:23572] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-6290/2024]
and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of
accused on bail.
5. Have considered the submissions made by both the parties
and have perused the material available on record.
6. Perusal of the record revealing that on 12.02.2022 a police
team of Police Station Sendra, District Pali apprehended two
persons out of which one was the petitioner and the other was
Rameshwar for the accusation of having 89.500 Kg Poppy husk.
7. As a matter of fact, the co-accused Rameshwar and Suresh
Kala have been granted bail by this Court as stated above thus,
the claim of parity cannot be denied both the reason of
maintaining judicial discipline and decency as well as for the
reason that the case of the petitioner is in no manner
distinguishable then to the case of the co-accused who have been
granted bail.
8. The another aspect which is legal one would be that the
search and seizure was not made in accordance with the
procedure established be by law and thus there seems a flagrant
volition of mandatory provision of the NDPS Act. In a recent
judgment titled as Mohammed Khalid and another Vs. The
State of Telangana passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in
Criminal Appeal No(S). 1610 Of 2023 dated 01.03.2024, it was
held that since no proceedings were undertaken for preparing of
inventory and drawings of samples as per Section 52-A of NDPS
Act, thus, the FSL was considered to be waste and was not
considered worthy of being read in evidence on the basis of this
inter alia other aspects, Hon'ble the Apex Court acquitted the
[2024:RJ-JD:23572] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-6290/2024]
appellants of all charges. The relevant paragraph of the above
judgment is reproduced as under:-
"22. Admittedly, no proceedings under Section 52A of the NDPS Act
were undertaken by the Investigating Officer PW-5 for preparing an
inventory and obtaining samples in presence of the jurisdictional
Magistrate. In this view of the matter, the FSL report (Exhibit P-11) is
nothing but a waste paper and cannot be read in evidence."
9. In light of the above, the legal and factual position, it is felt
that the embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act
would not come into play in granting bail to the petitioner who is
behind the bars for more than last two years. There is high
probability that the trial may take further long time to conclude. In
light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to
grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.
10. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439
Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as
named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he
furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two
sureties of Rs.25,000/- 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.
(FARJAND ALI),J
609-Mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
