The commercial quantity of recovered contraband and the status of the petitioner as a habitual offender are significant factors in determining whether bail should be granted in NDPS Act cases.

JUDGMENT

Madan Gopal Vyas, J. - The present criminal misc. second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner Udaipal @ Pala against the order dated 12.1.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Sriganganagar in relation to FIR No.222/2020 lodged at Police Station Lalgarh Jattan, District Sriganganagar for the offences under Section 8/15 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

2. The first bail application being SB Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.11735/2021 has been dismissed by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.9.2021 as not pressed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the agricultural field from where the contraband article was recovered does not belong to the petitioner. It is also submitted that there is non-compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since three and half years and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. In support of his contentions, learned counsel relied upon the following judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and orders of this Court:

(1) Gangadhar @ Gangaram Vs. State of MP (Cr. Appeal No.504/2020), decided on 5.8.2020

(2) Nadeem Vs. State of UP (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.1524/2022), decided on 22.4.2022

(3) Mahmood Kurdeya Vs. Narcotics Control Bureau (Cr. Appeal No.1570/2021), decided on 7.12.2021)

(4) orders dated 9.12.2020 in SB Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.10398/2020 (Sumerram Vs. State)

(5) dated 23.7.2020 in SB Cr. Misc.4th Bail Application No.5351/2020 (Kamal Singh Vs. State).

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. It is submitted that 105 kg of poppy straw, which is in commercial quantity was recovered in the present case and the present petitioner was present at the spot. It is also submitted that the petitioner is the Khatedar of the agricultural land from where the contraband article was recovered. It is also submitted that 8 other cases under various provisions are registered against the petitioner and the petitioner is a habitual offender. Therefore, it is prayed that the bail application filed by the petitioner may be rejected.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the recovered contraband is in commercial quantity and hit by the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, I do not find it to be a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the bail application filed by the petitioner is hereby rejected.

However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the case.