The absence of direct evidence against a petitioner, solely relying on co-accused statements, justifies the granting of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER :

(FARJAND ALI, J.)

1. This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.51/2023, registered at Police Station Ghamoodwali, District Sri Ganganagar, for offences under Sections 8/15 and 25 of NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the contraband (poppy husk/straw) greater than commercial quantity weighing 100 kgs. was recovered from the conscious possession of the co-accused persons namely Aslam and Vishnu. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the information supplied by the co-accused persons while they were in custody.

3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers and the statements of the Investigating Officer- Gopal Singh (PW.2), learned counsel submitted that apart from the information divulged by the co-accused persons while they were in custody, there is no other direct/circumstantial evidence is available on record indicating the involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged crime.

4. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and therefore, looking to the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the Investigating Officer- Gopal Singh (PW.2) during his cross-examination before the competent criminal Court has admitted the fact that apart from the statements of the co-accused persons, he had not collected any other evidence indicating the involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged crime.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.

7. The relevant portion of the cross-examination of the Investigating Officer- Gopal Singh (PW.2) is reproduced below for ready reference:-

8. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds sufficient force in the argument of learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the information supplied by the co-accused persons while they were in custody. This Court prima facie does not find any other direct/circumstantial evidence available on record indicating the involvement of the petitioner in commission of the alleged crime. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

9. Consequently, this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused- petitioner- Vinod Kumar @ Billa S/o Nihalchand, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.51/2023, registered at Police Station Ghamoodwali, District Sri Ganganagar, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, for his appearance before that Court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

10. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial Court shall not get prejudiced by the same.