IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
Kishore Kumar S/o Shri Bhikha Ram – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application Nos. 15934, 16343 of 2022
Decided On : 25-04-2023
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 439 - Arms Act - Section 5/25 - NDPS Act- Sections 8/21, 8/25, 8/29 42, 50, 52 and 55 - Psychotropic/narcotic substance – Possession - An information from reliable sources that present accused is going to sell psychotropic/narcotic substance to one of his customer in vehicle (Scorpio) bearing no. - As per prosecution case, separate notices were served upon both accused persons -After following due process, Scorpio was searched, wherefrom one plastic bag containing white powdery like substance was found which was disclosed to be ‘smack’ - That apart, from left pocket of his pyjama, two mobile phones and one white plastic bag containing smack were also recovered- Whether at stage of bail, it would be prudent for Court to deal with alleged violations of various provisions of Sections of NDPS Act, particularly when trial is going on and evidence in form of various prosecution witnesses and defence witnesses are yet to be recorded - Judgments cited by learned counsel are of no help to petitioners as in all these judgments, trial was already complete, whereas in instant case, petitioners are facing trial. Para 15
Finding of Court :
In present case, from perusal of challan and recovery memo, it is apparent that petitioner while responding to notice given under Section 50(1) of NDPS Act dated, gave his consent for being searched by S.H.O. P.S. Kotwali i.e. Seizure Officer (PW-4) - Prima-facie, compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act had been made - Trial has already commenced,, no final finding is required to be given in this regard - As far as argument with regard to violation of Section 52 of NDPS Act is concerned, suffice it to note that present petitioners were duly informed about grounds of their arrest and it cannot be said that their arrest in connection with offences under various sections of NDPS Act was illegal - No indulgence can be extended to petitioner on this count at stage of bail - As far as argument raised by the learned counsel for petitioner regarding his innocence is concerned, suffice it to note that both petitioners were found at place from where, huge quantity of contraband has been recovered- That apart, during personal search of petitioner, contraband (smack) weighing 10 gms. was recovered from his personal possession - Argument of learned counsel thus deserves to be rejected.
Result : bail applications are rejected.
ORDER :
1. These applications for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 297/2021, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Nagaur for the offences under Sections 8/21 and 8/29 NDPS Act and 3/25 Arms Act.
2. The earlier applications for bail were dismissed vide orders dated 21.4.2022 (Second CRLMB No. 3258/2022 Kishore vs. State) and 10.09.2021 (CRLMB No. 12421/2021 Gopal vs. State).
3. As per prosecution story, SHO Brijendra Singh C.I. PS Kotwali, Nagaur received an information from reliable sources that the present accused-Gopal is going to sell psychotropic/narcotic substance to one of his customer in vehicle (Scorpio) bearing no. RJ-23-UB-3022. On receiving aforesaid information, by following the procedure provided under Section 42(1) and (2) of NDPS Act, SHO, PS Kotwali, Nagaur with his team at about 11:50 P.M. reached to the dhani (group of houses in a village) of the petitioners, where they saw two persons standing. Upon seeing the police team, the accused tried to flee in their white Scorpio. The police team, however, succeeded in nabbing both the persons, who on being interrogated disclosed their names as Gopal and Kishore petitioners herein. As per prosecution case, separate notices under Section 50 of the NDPS Act were served upon both the accused persons. After following the due process, the Scorpio was searched, wherefrom one plastic bag containing white powdery like substance was found which was disclosed to be ‘smack’. During personal search of the present petitioners, a loaded pistol along with four live rounds was found from the pyjama worn by petitioner Gopal. That apart, from the left pocket of his pyjama, two mobile phones and one white plastic bag containing smack were also recovered. The psychotropic substance (smack) weighing 10-10 gms. was also recovered from the physical possession of each of the petitioners Kishore and Gopal, whereas 285 gms. smack was recovered from the vehicle (Scorpio). As per the prosecution, the total smack recovered from Scorpio as well as physical possession of the petitioners was 305 gms.
4. The investigating agency after making thorough investigation filed charge-sheet against both the petitioners before competent criminal court for the offences under Sections 8/21, 8/25 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act and Section 5/25 of the Arms Act.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners drawing attention towards the challan papers, recovery memo and statement of Seizure Officer Brijendra Singh (PW-4), submitted that the entire procedure of search and seizure conducted by the Seizure Officer is in gross violation of Sections 42, 50, 52 and 55 of the NDPS Act. To buttress this submission, reliance was placed upon the crossexamination of the Seizure Officer, Brijendra Singh (PW-4), whose testimony is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:
Abdul Rashid Ibrahim Mansuri vs. State of Gujarat
State of Rajasthan vs. Parmanand and Another
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Kajad
SupremeToday
Point of Law : violation of Section 52 of the NDPS Act is concerned, suffice it to note that present petitioners were duly informed about grounds of their arrest and therefore, it cannot be said that....
Strict adherence to the NDPS Act's provisions regarding search and seizure is essential; failure to comply can lead to the invalidation of evidence and grant of bail.
Point of law: Recovery of contraband – Rejection of bail - contraband article is more than the commercial quantity and the investigation is still pending
The main legal point established in the judgment is the impact of delay in trial on the accused's right to liberty, especially in cases governed by stringent bail conditions under special acts like t....
The court ruled that searches conducted by unauthorized officers under the NDPS Act are illegal, warranting the grant of bail due to prolonged detention without trial.
Procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence, and failure to adhere to these provisions can lead to the grant of bail.
Compliance with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Sections 42 and 52-A, is crucial for the validity of search, seizure, and evidence collection; failure to comply can lead to the....
Point of Law- It is pertinent to note that in the bail application the appellants, it was alleged, that there was serious violation of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. In the impugned order nothing is sta....
The court ruled that unauthorized searches under the NDPS Act invalidate the evidence, warranting bail for the accused due to procedural non-compliance.
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.