Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jasveer Singh @ Moni @ Boss vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:14628) on 19 March, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:14628]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3100/2025
Jasveer Singh @ Momi @ Boss S/o Satnam Singh, Aged About
27 Years, R/o Badi Maiyana (Gurudawar K Pass) Hosiyarpur,
Punjab. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, Ncb
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.S. Thind
Ms. Sonika
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.R. Pareek, Spl. PP for NCB
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
19/03/2025
The present second bail application has been filed under
Section 483 B.N.S.S. (Old Section 439 Cr.P.C.) on behalf of the
petitioner who is in judicial custody in connection with Case
No.VIII(10)08/NCB/JZU/2021 registered at Police Station NCB,
District Jodhpur for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C),
21 & 29 of the NDPS Act.
The first bail application was dismissed as not pressed by
this Court vide order dated 27.07.2022 with liberty to file afresh
after recording the statement of Seizure Officer/Investigating
Officer.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the similar
situated co-accused persons viz., Sunil Singh, Rajvinder Singh &
Sukhpreet Singh have already been enlarged on bail by this Court
[2025:RJ-JD:14628] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-3100/2025]
and the case of present petitioner is not distinguishable. The
petitioner is behind the bars for more than three years and trial of
the case is yet pending. In support of his contentions, learned
counsel placed reliance on the recent order dated 13.07.2023
passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Rabi Prakash
vs. The State of Odisha (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.4169/2023), wherein Hon'ble the Supreme Court held as
under:-
"3. We are informed that the trial has commenced
but only 1 out of the 19 witnesses has been
examined. The conclusion of trial will, thus, take
some more time.
4. As regard to the twin conditions contained in
Section 37 of the NDPS Act, learned counsel for the
respondent - State has been duly heard. Thus, the
1st condition stands complied with. So far as the
2nd condition re: formation of opinion as to
whether there are reasonable grounds to believe
that the petitioner is not guilty, the same may not
be formed at this stage when he has already spent
more than three and a half years in custody. The
prolonged incarceration, generally militates against
the most precious fundamental right guaranteed
under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a
situation, the conditional liberty must override the
statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)
(ii) of the NDPS
Act."
Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs.
K.A. Najeeb reported in (2021) 3 SCC 713, while dealing with the
cases where fetters are placed on Court's power to grant bail and
the trial has not been completed within a reasonable time,
observed as under:
"17. It is thus clear to us that the presence of
statutory restrictions like Section 43-D(5) of the
UAPA per se does not oust the ability of the
constitutional courts to grant bail on grounds of
violation of Part - III of the Constitution.
[2025:RJ-JD:14628] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-3100/2025]
Indeed, both the restrictions under a statute as
well as the powers exercisable under
constitutional jurisdiction can be well
harmonised. Whereas at commencement of
proceedings, the courts are expected to
appreciate the legislative policy against grant of
bail but the rigours of such provisions will melt
down where there is no likelihood of trial being
completed within a reasonable time and the
period of incarceration already undergone has
exceeded a substantial part of the prescribed
sentence. Such an approach would safeguard
against the possibility of provisions like Section
43-D(5) of the UAPA being used as the sole
metric for denial of bail or for wholesale breach
of constitutional right to speedy trial."
A coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Umesh Vyas
vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. II Bail Application
No.14958/2022), vide order dated 17.03.2023, also observed as
follows:
"The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Abdul
Majeed Lone Vs. Union Territory of Jammu and
Kashmir [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.3961/2022], Amit Singh Moni Vs. State of
Himachal Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.668/2020),
Tapan Das Vs. Union of India [Special Leave to
Appeal (Criminal) No.5617/2021], Kulwant Singh
Vs. State of Punjab [Special Leave to Appeal
(Criminal) No.5187/2019], Ghanshyam Sharma
Vs. State of Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal
(Criminal) No.5397/2019], Nadeem Vs. State of
UP [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.1524/2022] and Mukesh Vs. The State of
Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.4089/2021] has granted bail to the accused
persons, against whom the allegations are of
transporting or possessing narcotic contraband
above commercial quantity, on the ground of
custody period and taking into consideration the
fact that the trial against the said accused persons
will take time in completion. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court has ordered for release of the accused
persons who were in custody from two years to
four years. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed
the bail application.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to
[2025:RJ-JD:14628] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-3100/2025]
allow this fifth bail application solely on the ground
of custody period of the accused petitioner and
keeping in view the fact that the trial against him
has not been completed till date.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion
on the merits of the case, this second bail
application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is
allowed and it is directed that petitioner Umesh
Vyas S/o Shri Ganeshlal Ji shall be released on bail
in connection with FIR No.15/2019 of Police
Station Charbhuja, District Rajsamand provided he
executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-
with two sound and solvent sureties of
Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned
trial court for his appearance before that court on
each and every date of hearing and whenever
called upon to do so till the completion of the
trial."
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance
on the decision dated 28.03.2023 rendered by Hon'ble the
Supreme Court in Mohd Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of
Delhi) in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).915 of 2023,
wherein it is observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that delay in
trial can also be considered for releasing accused person on bail
despite the restrictions imposed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act
and in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Mohd Muslim @ Hussain's case (supra), the petitioner is
entitled to be enlarged on bail.
The petitioner is in judicial custody since 23.06.2021 and the
trial of the case will take sufficiently long time. With these
submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the
benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
Learned Special Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of
bail.
[2025:RJ-JD:14628] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-3100/2025]
I have considered the arguments advanced before me and
gone through the material available on record.
It is not disputed that the accused petitioner has so far
suffered incarceration of more than 3 years and trial is still going
on. So far as Section 37 of the NDPS Act is concerned, the
embargo put on grant of bail under Section 37 of the Act is not
total. In the provision, certain exceptions exist within Section 37
itself and for those exceptions, bail can be granted. In the present
case, the petitioner has so far suffered incarceration of more than
3 years, therefore, looking to the prolonged custody of the
petitioner it would not be appropriate to invoke the rigor
envisaged under Section 37 of NDPS Act.
Accordingly, the second bail application filed under Section
483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the accused
petitioner - Jasveer Singh @ Momi @ Boss S/o Satnam Singh shall
be released on bail in connection with Case
No.VIII(10)08/NCB/JZU/2021 registered at Police Station NCB,
District Jodhpur for provided he executes a personal bond in a
sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each to
the satisfaction of learned trial court for his 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
99-Rashi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
