IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Talwant Singh, J.
Vinod Rathore - Appellant
Versus
State NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Bail Appln. 4429 of 2021
Decided On : 22-04-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments for bail and claims of tampering (Para 4) |
| 3. prosecution refutation of bail arguments (Para 5) |
| 4. additional arguments concerning parity and weight issue (Para 6) |
| 5. court's reasoning and dismissal of bail application (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Talwant Singh, J.
1. This is an application for regular bail moved by the petitioner, who is facing trial under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short `NDPS') in FIR No. 187/2018, PS Crime Branch Delhi.
2. The FIR was registered on 21.07.2018 and charge-sheet was filed on 27.09.2018. First supplementary charge-sheet was filed on 22.10.2018. Charges under Section 29 NDPS were framed against all three accused persons and charge under Sections u/s 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act was framed against the Petitioner; charge u/s 20(b)(ii)(A) of NDPS Act was framed against Anmol Yadav @ Honey and charge under Section 25 of the NDPS Act was also framed against the accused Harmeet Singh @ Hunny. The petitioner is stated to be in J.C. since, 21.07.2018; except for the period of interim bail on two occasions.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on the basis of secret information SI Ram Kishan registered DD No. 18 at 5:15 PM on 20.07.2018. A raiding team was formed. On the way, IO stopped the car and requested 5-6 persons to join the investigation but no one agreed; on reaching the spot one Honda Civic car was found parked bearing registration No. DL2FHV0070, which was recognised by the secret informer, who also identified the present petitioner as well as the co-accused Anmol, who was standing near the car. The petitioner took out a black colour bag from the car and handed over the same to Anmol, who held the same on his left shoulder at the same time, the present petitioner also left with another bag holding it in his left hand. Both the accused persons were apprehended.
3.1. They were informed about their rights and given notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act; they denied to avail the opportunity to get themselves searched in the presence of Gazetted Officer/Magistrate and they further disclosed that they have Charas with them. SI Ram Kishan further requested 5-7 persons present there but they refused to join the investigation. The black colour bag in possession of the present petitioner was searched, from which one big packet and one small packet were recovered, having black colour sticky material, which had a foul smell. On checking the said material, it was found to be Charas. The total weight was 1100 gms; out of which 4 sample packets of 25 gms each were prepared and FSL form was filled. All the packets were taken in the Police custody and marked as Mark 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D. Remaining Charas was sealed in black colour bag and the same was marked as Mark 1E.
3.2. Thereafter search of accused Anmol @ Honey was conducted and the small packet was containing black sticky material having foul smell, which was found to be Charas. The weight was found out to be 100 gms; two samples were drawn of 25 gms each and similar process was conducted as was done in the case of present petitioner.
3.3. On receipt of Tehrir, FIR No. 187/2018 was registered. The case property was handed over to Malkhana. Investigation was handed over to ASI Murlidhar/IO. Special Arrest Report under Section 57 NDPS Act was prepared and sent to the Crime Branch. Both the accused disclosed that they had taken delivery of Charas from Harmeet Singh @ Hunny, who was caught from Seelampur Gol Chakkar on 23.07.2018 at 09:05 AM.
3.4. The Call Detail Records (CDRs) disclosed that there were several calls amongst the accused persons; the mobile phones of all the accused were seized and sent to FSL. The car was also seized. The co-accused Jagga, who, as per the statement of Harmeet Singh, was supplying him Charas, was not found and he had been declared a proclaimed offender (P.O.). Accused were charge-sheeted
The court reaffirmed that minor weight discrepancies in evidence do not undermine credibility and that substantial evidence of guilt warrants denial of bail under the NDPS Act.
Prolonged incarceration may override the statutory embargo created under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, leading to the grant of bail in certain cases.
The need for substantial probable causes for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence and the deleterious impact of narcotic drugs on society.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which applies when a commercial quantity of contraband is to be delivered to the accused, and the....
The admissibility of evidence, including confessional statements, and the application of Section 37 of the NDPS Act for bail, were central legal points established in the judgment.
Point of law: NDPS Act – Rejection of bail - Purpose of enacting the NDPS Act was to curb this menace. This purpose must be kept in mind while considering the grant of bail in matter pertaining to th....
The recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband establishes grounds to deny bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing conscious possession principles.
NDPS Act –Grant of Bail - Search and seizer of contraband “Charas” – Contraband received not commercial quantity - Bar of Section 37 of NDPS Act is not applicable
In cases of successive bail petitions, after dismissal of earlier bail petition(s), the petitioner has to demonstrate substantial change in circumstances and such change is of such a magnitude to con....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.