HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
SONU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
ORDER :
(KULDEEP MATHUR, J.)
1. The second application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.527/2023 registered at Police Station Sardarshahar, District Churu, for the offences under Sections 8/15 & 25 of the NDPS Act.
2. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers and the statements of the Seizure Officer- Manguram (PW-1) recorded before the competent criminal Court, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, on 06.11.2023 contraband (Poppy Husk/straw) greater than commercial quantity was recovered from a truck bearing registration No. HR-37-E-9738. Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution at the time when the contraband was recovered, co-accused Ankush was sitting on the wheel of the offending vehicle. As far as the present petitioner is concerned, he was sitting beside the co-accused as a helper.
3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the various documents and the statements of the co-accused Ankush recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused Ankush was the registered owner of the o
Bail may be granted if the accused shows no knowledge of the contraband and has been in custody for a significant time, despite the seriousness of the charges.
The absence of direct evidence against the accused and satisfaction of bail conditions under the NDPS Act justified the grant of bail.
The court ruled that non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act rendered the evidence inadmissible, justifying bail for the petitioner.
The court ruled that the petitioners were not in conscious possession of contraband and satisfied the conditions for bail under the NDPS Act.
The court granted bail due to lack of evidence against the petitioner and the lengthy trial duration, emphasizing the need for substantial grounds to question the prosecution's case.
Compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act is essential for evidence validity; prolonged judicial custody without trial examination raises constitutional concerns, allowing bail despite stringent N....
The court emphasized that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless the twin conditions are satisfied, especially in cases involving large quantities of contraband.
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.
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 absence of direct evidence against the petitioner and the lengthy trial process justified the granting of bail.
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.