Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Vijay Bishnoi, J.
Devkaran – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 104 of 2022
Decided On : 09-05-2022
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Bail Application - Collection of Samples
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was arrested for possession of 1250 tablets containing narcotic substance Tramadol. He filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C, arguing that only 10 tablets out of 1250 were sent for FSL testing and therefore he should be granted bail.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, held that the question raised by the petitioner regarding the collection of samples cannot be considered at this stage and should be addressed by the trial court after considering the evidence.
Issues: The issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail based on the alleged incomplete collection of samples for FSL testing.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided that the question of sample collection should be addressed by the trial court after considering the evidence, and therefore the petitioner was not entitled to bail at this stage.
Final Decision: The criminal misc. second bail application was rejected.
JUDGMENT
Vijay Bishnoi, J. - Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
2. The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.227/2019 of Police Station Purani abadi, District Sri Ganganagar for the offence punishable under Section 8/22 NPDS act. He has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the prosecution story, 1250 tablets containing narcotic substance Tramadol weighing 500 gms. have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, however, out of 1250 only 10 tablets have been taken as samples and sent for FSL. It is also submitted that the police have not sent the total 1250 tablets for FSL and on this count alone the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application of the petitioner and submitted that since all the strips of 1250 tablets containing narcotic substance Tramadol weighing 500 gms. are similar in nature, only one strip has been collected for sample and, therefore, there is no illegality in the same. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the question raised by the petitioner regarding collection of samples cannot be looked at this stage and it is for the trial court to consider the same after taking into consideration the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution as well as defence, hence, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner.
6. accordingly, this criminal misc. second bail application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.
The decision emphasized that the question of sample collection should be addressed by the trial court after considering the evidence, and this was the basis for rejecting the bail application.
The court considered the total weight of the recovered narcotic substances and poppy straw, which was below commercial quantity, in granting bail to the accused petitioner.
The court considered the nature of the recovered substance, the absence of other pending cases against the accused-petitioner, and the expected duration of the trial in granting bail under Section 43....
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the assessment of the quantity of contraband substance, the duration of the applicant's custody, and the likelihood of the trial taking sufficient time....
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the lack of recovery of narcotic drugs from the petitioner and the absence of conversation between the petitioner and the co-accused persons on th....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
