Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
Shivraj – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Order :
1. These applications for bail underSection 439 Cr.P.C . (483 BNSS) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.104/2024, registered at Police Station Gangashahar, District Bikaner, for offences under Sections 8/22, 8/18 and 25 of NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.
3. As per the prosecution, on 16.03.2024, A.S.I. Nagendra Singh alongwith other police officials, during nakabandi near Ghadseesar Fanta Jodhpur Bypass flagged down one Swift car bearing registration No.RJ-14-CT-5145. The co-accused- Omprakash @ Pinki was sitting on the wheel of the offending vehicle whereas the petitioner- Shivraj was sitting beside him. On suspicion that they possessed some prohibited substance in the vehicle, the police team after following the procedure provided under the NDPS Act searched the vehicle whereupon, contraband MDMA weighing 95 gms. and contraband opium weighing 1 kg. in 2 plastic bags were recovered from the dashboard of the offending vehicle. The petitioner- Shivraj and co-accused- Omprakash @ Pinki in their statements recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, di
The court denied bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the serious nature of the charges and the need for pending witness statements before reconsidering bail.
The court emphasized that serious charges under the NDPS Act require careful consideration, and merits should not be prejudged at the bail stage.
The court emphasized that the seriousness of the offence and the quantity of contraband are critical in bail considerations, and procedural violations do not automatically warrant bail.
The court reinforced that under the NDPS Act, the burden lies on the accused to demonstrate a lack of guilt for bail eligibility, particularly in serious drug offenses.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 37 of the NDPS Act in deciding bail applications and the assessment of evidence against the accused.
The court held that jurisdictional compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial, but evidence against the petitioner is sufficient to deny bail, with non-compliance issues to be addressed at trial.
The court granted bail based on prolonged incarceration and non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, emphasizing the right to personal liberty under Article 21.
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
