Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Nareshpuri – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
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.467/2019 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jalore, District Jalore, for offences under Sections 8/22 and 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the present case, psychotropic substance much above the commercial quantity (TRIO-SR Tablets) was recovered from the conscious possession of the co-accused Jahangir. The co-accused Jahangir, in the information divulged by him under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, informed that he had procured the recovered contraband from the co-accused Chainaram. The co-accused Chainaram thereupon supplied an information that the recovered contraband was procured by him from the present petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the co-accused persons namely Jahangir, Chainaram and Papendra @ Kalu have already been acquitted by the competent criminal court after conducting regular criminal trial against them. Learned counsel submitted that since the co-ac
The acquittal of co-accused and absence of contraband from the petitioner justify the granting of bail, indicating low likelihood of conviction.
The court granted bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing that the substance recovered was below commercial quantity and considering the precedent of co-accused being granted bail.
The absence of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the supply of psychotropic substances, alongside the bail granted to co-accused, justified the approval of bail.
The court established that possession of Psychotropic Substances below commercial quantity warrants bail, especially when the investigation is complete.
Bail can be granted when the accused is not a flight risk and the case is similar to that of a co-accused who was previously granted bail.
The principle of parity in bail applications allows for granting bail when a co-accused has already been released, especially in the absence of criminal antecedents and when no recovery was made from....
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the principle of parity with a co-accused already released on bail.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the absence of any risk of fleeing or re-offending.
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient grounds for continued detention based on the nature of the charges and comparison with a co-accused already granted bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
