Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Devendra Kachhawaha, J.
Ganpat Lal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3609 of 2022
Decided On : 16-03-2022
NDPS Act - Bail Application - The court granted bail to the accused-petitioner based on the interpretation of the maximum punishment for possessing opium plants under the NDPS Act and the orders passed by co-ordinate Bench(s) of the Court in identical matters.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with an F.I.R. for the offence punishable under Sections 8/15 and 8/18 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution stated that 5240 green plants of opium/poppy husk were recovered from the petitioner's possession.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, granted bail to the petitioner based on the orders passed by co-ordinate Bench(s) of the Court in identical matters.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner deserved bail considering the recovery of opium plants and the applicable punishment under the NDPS Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the maximum punishment for possessing opium plants under the NDPS Act and the precedent set by the orders passed by co-ordinate Bench(s) of the Court in identical matters.
Final Decision: The bail application of the accused-petitioner was allowed, and it was ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing the specified personal bond and sureties.
JUDGMENT
Devendra Kachhawaha, J. - The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.16/2022, Police Station Jhab, District Jalore, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8/15 and 8/18 of the NDPS act.
2. Heard and considered arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that as per prosecution, 5240 green plants of opium/poppy husk have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel while submitting copies of orders passed by co-ordinate Bench(s) of this Court stated that as per the notification dated 16.07.1996, issued by the Central Government, specifying small and commercial quantity and the Section 18(C) of the NDPS act, the maximum punishment can be awarded to an accused person for possessing opium plant is up to 10 years, therefore, Section 37 of the NDPS act is not applicable in the matter. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioner.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the orders passed by co-ordinate Bench(s) of this Court in identical matters, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.
6. Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner - Ganpat Lal S/o Bhagga Ram, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.16/2022, Police Station Jhab, District Jalore, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) and two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the 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.
The interpretation of the maximum punishment for possessing opium plants under the NDPS Act and the precedent set by the orders passed by co-ordinate Bench(s) of the Court in identical matters influe....
The court considered the lengthy trial process and absence of other pending cases in granting bail to the accused-petitioner for the offense under the NDPS act.
The court established that bail can be granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. even in cases involving serious allegations under the NDPS Act, provided the circumstances warrant such a decision.
The court granted bail under the NDPS Act, finding no commercial quantity prescribed for cultivation and no risk of tampering with evidence.
The court's discretion to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
The absence of specified small and commercial quantities for opium poppy cultivation under the NDPS Act means Section 37 does not apply, allowing for bail.
The court ruled that the absence of specified commercial quantity for poppy cultivation under the NDPS Act, combined with lack of evidence tampering risk, justifies granting bail.
The court determined that the restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply when the offence does not involve commercial quantity or severe sections, allowing bail.
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
