The absence of total weight of contraband in the charge-sheet raises doubts about the validity of recovery, warranting bail.

ORDER :

KULDEEP MATHUR, J.

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.241/2024 registered at Police Station Ahore, District Jalore, for offences under Sections 8/22 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR and challan papers, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, 1480 tablets of TROMA-100 SR (Tramadol Hydrochloride Sustained Release Tablets IP 100 mg), 1250 tablets of Alpram 0.5 (Alprazolam Tablets IP 0.5 mg.) and 30 tablets of ULTRA KING (Tramadol Hydrochloride & amp; Aeetaminophen Tablets USP) have been recovered from the conscious possession of the co-accused Sitaram. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case solely on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Sitaram without there being any direct/circumstantial evidence available against him on record.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that total weight of the alleged contraband has not been mentioned by the investigating agency in the charge-sheet and only the numbers of tablets have been mentioned which makes the entire seizure proceedings doubtful.

5. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that total weight of the alleged contraband has not been mentioned in the charge-sheet and only the numbers of tablets have been mentioned.

7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that a coordinate Bench of this Court while deciding S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9232/2021 (Kulbeer Singh vs. State) and S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7343/20221 (Angrej Singh vs. State) has been pleased to hold that if the total weight of the contraband has not been mentioned in the charge-sheet and only the number of tablets has been mentioned then the same will create a suspicion over the correctness/validity of the recovery. This Court further prima facie finds that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner involving in a case of similar nature in case he is enlarged on bail.

8. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

9. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Narendra Choudhary S/o Tulsaram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.241/2024 registered at Police Station Ahore, District Jalore, 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.