The court established that non-compliance with procedural safeguards in the NDPS Act can significantly impact the prosecution's case and the accused's right to bail.

ORDER :

FARJAND ALI, J.

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioners. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioners that no case for the alleged offences is made out against them and their incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioners and they have been made accused based on conjectures and surmises.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that co-accused persons viz. Sunil, Sunny Sharma @ Sanju and Prakash have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.04.2024 passed in SBCRLMB Nos.238/2024, 15746/2023 and 16263/2023 respectively and the case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from that of co-accused in any manner.

4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail. He is not in a position to dispute the fact that co-accused persons viz. Sunil, Sunny Sharma @ Sanju and Prakash have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.04.2024 passed in SBCRLMB Nos.238/2024, 15746/2023 and 16263/2023 respectively and the case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from that of co-accused in any manner.

5. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record.

6. This Court by a detailed order dated 04.04.2024 has granted bail to the above named co-accused persons. The relevant part of the said order is being reproduced hereunder :-

“4. Bereft of elaborate details, briefly stated the facts are that on 20.12.2022, the police team of Police Station Rajiyasar intercepted two vehicles i.e. SWIFT Car and a BOLERO Pickup. The Bolero pickup was being driven by the accused Sunil and the accused Sunny Sharma @ Sanju was sitting by his side. The driver of the Car was Prakash and the another persons sitting in the car were Bhupendra and Bablu. It is alleged that 76 Kg poppy husk came to be recovered from these vehicles and all three petitioners namely Sunil, Sunny Sharma @ Sanju and Prakash were arrested for the accusation of having contraband with them without having any license. The incident said to have taken place on 20.12.2022 at around 11:00 a.m. near Vijaynagar-Hindol Toll Plaza, Rajiyasar. Hence, these bail applications.

5. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioners that no case for the alleged offences is made out against them and their incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioners and they have been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

6. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

7. Have considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the copies of the challan papers attached with the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. as well as the other material provided on behalf of the accused particularly the orders dated 08.05.2023 and 19.06.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Suratgarh in respect of an application under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C.

8. A plea was raised on behalf of the defence that a false case has been foisted against the petitioners and no recove