ORDER :

1. With due consent of both the sides, the instant batch of bail cancellation applications, arising from analogous factual matrices, is taken up for final disposal.

2. The instant bail cancellation application is filed for cancellation of bail granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the accused-respondent vide order dated 26.08.2021 in Criminal Misc. Case No. 716/2021 titled as Shyam Sundar Mundara vs. State of Rajasthan. Furthermore, by way of the present application, a challenge is also made to the order dated 27.09.2021 passed in Case No. 778/2021, whereby the application for bail cancellation preferred by the State against the aforesaid order dated 26.08.2021 was dismissed.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPLICANT-STATE

3. Learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. Ghanshyam S. Rathore, appearing on behalf of the State, has submitted that the impugned orders(s) dated 26.08.2021 and 27.09.2021, have been passed in blatant ignorance of material considerations and the settled position of law, and therefore, being wholly perverse, are liable to be quashed and set aside. It has been submitted that there is sufficient evidence to infer direct and indirect involvement of the accused-respondent in the commission of the offence(s) registered under Sections 8/22 and 8/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. In particular, learned AAG has prayed for the cancellation of the bail so granted to the accused-respondent, on the following grounds:

(a) That a substantially large/commercial quantity of prohibited substances/narcotic drugs and psychotropic contrabands were recovered from the constructive possession of the accused-respondent, including;

(i) Tramadol Hydrochloride, in the form of capsules and injections, for which the commercial quantity as prescribed under Entry 238 ZH of the Schedule under the NDPS Act is 250gm.

(ii) Alprazolam, for which the commercial quantity as prescribed under Entry 178 of the Schedule under NDPS Act is 100gm.]

(b) That the learned Special Judge NDPS Act, while passing the impugned order(s) dated 26.08.2021 and 27.09.202 did not deal with the fetter contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, as per which, before granting bail to the accused under the said Act, a prima facie satisfaction has to be recorded that the accused was not involved in the commission of the crime, as alleged. Having not done so, the learned Special Judge has committed an error of law as well as fact.

(c) That the impugned order(s) dated 26.08.2021 and 27.09.2021 were passed at a pre-mature stage, whilst substantial investigation in the matter was still pending. In this regard, it was illustrated that the charge-sheet in the matter was filed in November, 2021, whereas the bail order was passed considerably before.

(d) That the drugs so recovered, as mentioned herein-above, were not only in a markedly larger quantity as against the commercial quantity prescribed for the same, but they cumulatively weighed approximately 3645 kg. (inclusive of the recovery in all the FIRs) and their corresponding market value stood at crores of rupees.

(e) That the learned Special Judge failed to appreciate the ‘Disclosure Statements’ statements tendered by the co-accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, including those tendered by Sheikh Sajid and Kamal Deep Morya, whereby specific roles have been attributed to the accused-respondent for the transportation as well as illicit/clandestine procurement of the prohibited substances.

(f) That the learned Special Judge failed to appreciate the recovered ‘Rent Agreement’ by way of the information provided under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, from the accused-respondent i.e. Shyam Sundar Mundra, of Welcome Pharma, upon which the signature of the accused-respondent as a witness is reflected.

(g) That a bare perusal of the FIR reveals that the matter involves chance/accidental recovery of the prohibited substances, therefore, p