Bail granted due to lack of direct evidence against the petitioner and fulfillment of conditions under the NDPS Act.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.27/2023 registered at Police Station Pur, District Bhilwara, for offences under Sections 8/15 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused persons namely Hari Kishan (S.B. Cr. Misc. 2^nd Bail Application No.13175/2024) and Kalu Mohammad (S.B. Cr. Misc. 2^nd Bail Application No.1019/2025) have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2025. Learned counsel submitted that the allegation against the petitioner Nand Lal @ Nanda is that he was escorting the pick-up vehicle having registration No.RJ-14-GG-9701 loaded with contraband (poppy husk/straw) on the date of the alleged incident. Learned counsel submitted that the case of the present petitioner is not worse than the above named co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail.

3. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody; challan has already been filed and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the above named co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

6. The order dated 05.02.2025 passed by this Court while granting bail to the co-accused persons namely Hari Kishan and Kalu Mohammad is reproduced herein below for ready reference:

“These second applications for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.27/2023 registered at Police Station Pur, Dist. Bhilwara, for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15, 29 of NDPS Act and Section 477 of IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioners.

Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR, the challan papers and the statements of the Investigating Officer (PW.5) recorded before the competent criminal Court, learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution, the contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 215.200 kgs. was recovered from an abandoned pickup vehicle bearing registration No.RJ-14-GG- 9701. The petitioners have been made accused in the present case solely on the basis of FASTag of the offending vehicle. Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution, the amount of FASTag at toll plaza situated at National Highway-48 was deducted from the FASTag affixed on the windshield of the offending vehicle which was connected/registered with mobile No.9983551145 in the name of Ram Swaroop. When Ram Swaroop was questioned by the Investigating Agency, he stated that mobile No.9983551145 is being used by his younger brother Harikishan (petitioner). The petitioner- Harikishan in the information divulged by him under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act stated that on the date of the alleged incident, the offending vehicle was being driven by the petitioner- Kalu Mohammad.

Learned counsel submitted that though the petitioners have been implicated in the present case on the basis of the FASTag allegedly affixed on the windshield of the offending vehicle but the Investigating Officer (PW.5) during his Court statements has stated that no such FASTag was recovered by him. Further, there is nothing on record to establish that any FASTag was connected/registered with the mobile phone allegedly used by the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the