Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Satveer Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:42987) on 21 October, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2024:RJ-JD:42987]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12423/2024
Pradeep Singh @ Deepu S/o Jagtar Singh, Aged About 31 Years,
R/o Ward No. 10, Prem Nagar, Barnala, P.s. City-2, Barnala, Dist.
Barnala, Punjab (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Hanumangarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9816/2024
Satveer Singh S/o Gurdayal Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Gursevak Nagar Mohalla, Tehsil And Dist. Barnala, Punjab. (At
Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Hanumangarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Achala Ram
For Respondent(s) : Mr. H.S. Jodha, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
21/10/2024
The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR
No.237/2021 registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Junction,
District Hanumangarh for the offence punishable under Sections
8/15 & 25 of NDPS Act. They have preferred this second bail
applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C.(Now Section 483 BNSS)
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the recovery
of contraband was made on 25.04.2021 and the samples were
[2024:RJ-JD:42987] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12423/2024]
sent for FSL on 27.04.2021 and the inventory in this case has
prepared on 02.02.2022 by the Investigating Officer. Counsel
submits that this shows that there is clear cut violation of
provisions of Section 52(A) of NDPS Act. He further submits that
recovery in this case has been made from co-accused Avtar Singh
and petitioner Pradeep Singh implicated with the aid of Section
8/29 of NDPS Act and petitioner Satveer implicated with the aid of
Section 25 of NDPS Act. The petitioners are inside the jail since
long and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be
concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bails should be granted to the
accused-petitioners. He relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Khalid and Anr. Vs.
State of Telangana, Criminal Appeal No.1610/2023,
decided on 01.03.2024. The relevant para is as under:
"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. The accused A-3 and A-4 were
not arrested at the spot. The offence under Section 20(b)(ii)
(c) deals with production, manufacture, possession, sale,
purchase, transport, import or export of cannabis. It is not
the case of the prosecution that the accused A-3 and A-4
were found in possession of ganja. The highest case of the
prosecution which too is not substantiated by any admissible
or tangible evidence is that these two accused had conspired
sale / purchase of ganja with A-1 and A-2. The entire case of
the prosecution as against these two accused is based on the
interrogation notes A-1 and A-2".
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the second bail
applications.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
[2024:RJ-JD:42987] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12423/2024]
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances
of the case and considering the fact that the petitioners are inside
the jail since long, without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bails to the accused
petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C.( Now Section 483 BNSS).
Accordingly, this second bail applications filed under Sec.439
Cr.P.C. (Now 483 BNSS) are allowed and it is directed that
petitioners (1) Pradeep Singh @ Deepu S/o Jagtar Singh & (2)
Satveer Singh S/o Gurdayal Singh, shall be released on bail in
connection with FIR No.237/2021 registered at Police Station
Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh, provided they
execute personal bonds in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with two
sound and solvent sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each to the
satisfaction of learned trial court for their appearance before that
court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon
to do so till the completion of the trial.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
72-73 Ishan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
