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.

Headnote:
(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 15, 29, and 37 - Bail application filed by the petitioner arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 48/2024 for possession of contraband - Petitioner implicated solely based on co-accused's disclosure statements - Co-accused already granted bail - Court finds no substantial grounds for continued detention - Bail granted with conditions. (Paras 5, 6)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail - The court must assess the seriousness of allegations, the nature of the contraband, and the involvement of the accused in the case - The petitioner’s case is not worse than that of the co-accused who was granted bail. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was arrested for possession of 56 Kgs. of poppy husk, a commercial quantity, based on the statements of co-accused Parvesh. Another co-accused, Krishnapal Singh, was granted bail previously. (Paras 1, 5)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioner was not in possession of a greater quantity of contraband than the co-accused and that the trial would take considerable time. (Paras 5, 6)

Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering the nature of the charges and the circumstances of the case. (Paras 5, 6)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner’s involvement was not substantiated by the recovery of contraband from him, and the seriousness of the allegations did not warrant continued detention. (Paras 5, 6)

Result: Bail application allowed.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.48/2024 registered at Police Station Jaloda Jagir, Dist. Pratapgarh, for the offences under Sections 8/15 and 29 of NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 56 Kgs. was recovered from the conscious possession of co-accused Parvesh. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of disclosure statements of co-accused Parvesh.

3. Learned counsel further submitted that another co-accused Krishnapal Singh (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.11605/2024) who had allegedly supplied the recovered comtraband to co-accused Parvesh, has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.09.2024. The order dated 18.09.2024 passed by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court while enlarging Krishnapal Singh is reproduced below for ready reference:

“1. Petitioner is lugged and locked in F.I.R No.48/2024 of Police Station Jaloda Jaagir, District Pratapgarh, for the offence under Section(s) 08/15, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. He has filed this application for restoration of liberty under section 483 of BNSS (Section 439 of the old Code).

2. Heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, learned Public Prosecutor and carefully perused the entire material available in case diary.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has strongly objected the different submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that 56 Kgs. of contraband Poppy Husk has been recovered in this matter which was commercial quantity. He urged that rigor of Section 37 of the NDPS Act is clearly attracted in the instant case so as to thwart his bail plea. He thus, prayed that in the facts of the present case, it is expedient that accused be kept in the custody.

4. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions with reference to material placed before me.

5. On perusal of the record, it would be clear that 56 Kgs of contraband Poppy Husk was recovered from co- accused Pravesh Patidar. Petitioner is in custody since 25.08.2024. The marginally above quantity of contraband has been recovered from the petitioner. In this background and having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case as available on record, this Court is inclined to extend indulgence of bail to the accused petitioner. Having considered the material available on record and the fact that bail rejection order goes to show that applicant is not involved in any other case under the N.D.P.S. Act; that trial is likely to take its own considerable time and taking note of all these aspects, I do not intend to go into the merits of the matter but of the considered view that the rigor of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. act is duly satisfied, forasmuch this court feels that the applicant has available to him substantial grounds so as to question the prosecution case and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in detention for an indefinite period therefore, I am inclined to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioner at this stage.

6. Consequently, the present bail application is allowed and it is directed that the accused-petitioner Krishnapal Singh S/o Shri Govind Singh, arrested in connection with the F.I.R. No. 48/2024 of Police Station Jaloda Jaagir, District Pratapgarh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond and two surety bonds of sufficient amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. This order is subject to the condition that accused, within 7 days of his release, and sureties on the day of furnishing bail, will also furnish details of their all bank acco

Click Here to Read the rest of this document