Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
SHIV LAL SARAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. These applications for bail under Section 483 BNSS (old Section 439 Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.53/2024 registered at Police Station Gangashahar, District Bikaner, for the offences under Sections 8/15 & 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that contraband (Poppy Husk/Straw) weighing 58.530 kgs was recovered from conscious possession of Radheshyam S/o Bhanwar Lal (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12340/2024), Tola Ram S/o Bhanwar Ram (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11628/2024) and Tola Ram S/o Bhagirath (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10984/2024). Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the abovenamed co-accused persons from whose conscious possession the contraband (Poppy Husk/Straw) was allegedly recovered, have already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Benches of this Court. The allegation against present petitioner-Shiv Lal Saran is that he had supplied the recovered contraband to the above named co-accused per
The principle of parity in bail applications allows for the release of accused if co-accused in similar circumstances have been granted bail.
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.
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.
The court granted bail based on the determination that the quantity of contraband supplied was below commercial threshold and the petitioner had no prior criminal antecedents.
Bail granted due to lack of direct evidence against the petitioner and fulfillment of conditions under the NDPS Act.
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.
Bail may be granted when the accused is not in direct possession of contraband and there is no evidence of reoffending.
The absence of direct evidence against the petitioner and the lengthy trial process justified the granting of 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
