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 the day of the incident.

JUDGMENT

Vijay Bishnoi, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

2. The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.57/2020 of Police Station Muklawa, District Sri Ganganagar for the offences punishable under Sections 8/22 and 29 NDPS 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, huge quantity of tablets containing narcotic substance above commercial quantity have been recovered at the instance of two co-accused persons viz. Firoz Khan and Aslam on 10.05.2020. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, the above named two co-accused persons while in police custody have informed that they procured the said narcotic substance from the petitioner. It is further submitted that on the basis of the said information, the police have filed charge-sheet against the petitioner, though, it is well settled that any information supplied by the accused persons while in police custody is not admissible in evidence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the statements of Investigation Officer - Chandrajeet Singh have been recorded before the trial court as PW-2 and in his evidence, he has admitted that no narcotic drugs have been recovered from the petitioner. It is also admitted by Investigating Officer that on the day of the incident, there was no conversation between the petitioner and the other co-accused persons. It is stated by Investigating Officer that the co-accused persons were in contact with the petitioner prior to the day of incident but what conversation took place between them is not known to him.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that simply because the petitioner was having some conversation with the co-accused persons days before the incident, it cannot be said that the petitioner is involved in commission of crime. It is prayed that the petitioner is in custody since long and trial of the case will take time, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

7. Accordingly, this criminal misc. second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Ranjhe Khan @ Ranju Khan S/o Gulam Kadar shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.57/2020 of Police Station Muklawa, District Sri Ganganagar provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of 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.