2008(3) Crimes 345 (Raj.)
SHORT NOTE
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
S.P. Pathak, J.
Girraj—Petitioner
versus
State of Rajasthan—Respondent
S.B. (Bail) Application No. 315 of 2008
Decided on 28.1.2008

Headnote:NDPS Act, 1985—Section 31—Deceased on 28.1.2008—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 439—Bail—Contraband Ganja was recovered from co-accused and after his arrest and after lapse of couple of days that co-accused gave information that petitioner-accused was also involved—Petitioner deserved to be given benefit of bail.

       Held: It is the admitted position of facts that contra-banned material Ganja has not been recovered from the accused-petitioner and one of the co-accused after his arrest and after lapse of couple of days gave information that accused petitioner is also involved in this case. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it proper to give benefit of bail to the accused-petitioner, for the reason that statement of co-accused is not permissible in evidence as has been held in case of Lachhu @ Laxmi v. Union of India. In view of the above the bail application moved by the accused petitioner requires to be allowed.(Para 4)

       Result: Petition allowed.