HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Kalu Nath – 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.49/2017 registered at Police Station Borunda, District Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 8/18 & 29 of NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the matter solely on the basis of confessional statements of the co-accused Karma Ram from whose conscious contraband (opium) weighing 9 kgs. was recovered. Learned counsel further submitted that the recovery of the contraband (opium) was not made from the conscious possession of the present petitioner and the only allegation against him is that he along with co-accused Raju Lal had supplied the recovered contraband to the co-accused Karma Ram.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co- accused Raju Lal (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.8061/2017) has already been enlarged on bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.10.2017. Learned counsel further
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.
Bail may be granted when the accused is not in direct possession of contraband and there is no evidence of reoffending.
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the principle of parity with a co-accused already released on bail.
Bail granted based on lack of conscious possession of contraband and previous bail granted to co-accused, emphasizing the trial's expected duration.
Bail may be granted under the NDPS Act when the accused is not in direct possession of contraband and meets the twin conditions for bail.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the absence of any risk of fleeing or re-offending.
Bail may be granted when the petitioner is not in possession of contraband and co-accused have been released, considering judicial custody and absence of criminal antecedents.
Confessional statements under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act are inadmissible, and lack of evidence warrants bail under NDPS Act.
The court established that recovery of contraband below commercial quantity can justify bail, even in cases of joint possession.
The principle of parity in bail decisions applies when co-accused are granted bail, especially when no contraband is recovered from the petitioner.
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.