IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Praveer Bhatnagar, J.
Prabhulal - Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2219 of 2024, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2480 of 2024.
Decided On : 28-02-2024
(A) NDPS Act - Sections 8, 21, 25 & 29 - Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. - Petitioners apprehending arrest in connection with FIR No. 49/2024 - Allegations of false implication based on co-accused's statements - No substantive evidence against petitioners - Custodial investigation deemed unnecessary - Anticipatory bail granted with conditions. (Paras 1-5)
(B) Bail - Conditions for anticipatory bail - Petitioners required to cooperate with investigation and not leave the country without permission. (Para 5)
ORDER :
Praveer Bhatnagar, J.
Apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No. 49/2024 registered at Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar for the offence(s) under Sections 8, 21, 25 & 29 of the NDPS Act, the petitioners have preferred these anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act. The accused-petitioners have nothing to do with the alleged offence and have been implicated in the case based upon the statements of the co-accused Ghanshyam, from whom possession of 100 gms. smack was recovered. Apart from the disclosure statement, there is no substantive piece of evidence available on record against the accused-petitioners. He further submits that no custodial investigation of the accused-petitioners are required. He prays that the anticipatory bail of accused-petitioners may be allowed.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail applications and submits that recovery of contraband article was effected from co-accused Ghanshyam and his disclosure statement name of the present petitioners was revealed. He further submits that co-accused Ghanshyam was constantly in contact with the accused-petitioners through mobile. Therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, anticipatory bail of accused-petitioners may be dismissed.
4. Having considered the overall allegations levelled in the FIR and the contentions made by counsel for the accused-petitioners, so also the fact that petitioners have joined the investigation, therefore, custodial investigation is not required, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail applications of the accused-petitioners.
5. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioners- Prabhulal S/o Uddalal and Jagdish S/o Madanlal, in connection with FIR No. 49/2024 registered at Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar, they shall be released on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:-
(ii) that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and
(iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.
Anticipatory bail granted when no substantive evidence exists against petitioners and they cooperated with the investigation.
The court granted anticipatory bail due to lack of substantive evidence against the accused-petitioner and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when substantial evidence is lacking, and the accused is willing to cooperate with the investigation.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the absence of recovered contraband, the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents, and the previous grant of bail to a co-accused.
The main legal point established is that for grant of anticipatory bail under the NDPS Act, there must be reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and is not likely to commit an offens....
The absence of independent corroborative evidence beyond a co-accused's confession does not suffice to deny anticipatory bail under the NDPS Act, provided the accused shows reasonable grounds for bel....
Custodial investigation is required in cases pertaining to the NDPS Act for elicitation of truth, especially when the menace of drugs affects the public at large and has adverse social and medical im....
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.