Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Tufan, S/o. Ghasilal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp – Respondent
Order :
(FARJAND ALI, J.)
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application(s) under Section 439 CrPC at the instance of accused-petitioners. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
| S.No. | Particulars of the Case | |
| 1. | FIR Number | 153/2023 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Rawatbhata |
| 3. | District | Chittorgarh |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR | Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act |
| 5. | Offences added, if any | - |
| 6. | Date of passing of impugned order (SBCRLM3rdB No.4088/2025) | 05.03.2025 |
| 6. | Date of passing of impugned order (SBCRLM2ndB No.4091/2025) | 04.03.2025 |
2. The concise facts of the case as alleged in the FIR are that on 28.08.2023 SHO Rajnish Kumar along with his team during patrolling the driver and two others of Pick-Up bearing registration RJ20-GB8521 on seeing the police party tried to fled away but were apprehended and disclosed their names as Chouthmal, Tufan and Mukesh Gurjar (Driver). Upon being search, 16 bags weighing 304.4 Kg poppy husk came to be recovered. On the basis of the above, after search and seizure, they were arrested and a case under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act got registered. The first and second bail application being SBCRLMB Nos.3277/2024 & 10244/24 (
Bail is a rule at the pre-conviction stage, and denial should be an exception, especially when evidence against the accused is lacking.
The court prioritized the right to a speedy trial over statutory restrictions on bail, emphasizing that personal liberty should not be compromised by prolonged incarceration without trial.
Bail is the rule at the pre-conviction stage, and denial should be exceptional, especially when evidence is insufficient and the accused's rights are at stake.
Procedural irregularities in the seizure of evidence under the NDPS Act can lead to the grant of bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the right to a speedy trial.
The court granted bail based on insufficient evidence against the petitioner and the principle of parity with a co-accused already released on bail.
The court established that procedural non-compliance in drug seizure cases can justify bail, prioritizing individual liberty over statutory restrictions.
Bail may be granted under the NDPS Act when the accused is not in direct possession of contraband and meets the twin conditions for bail.
Provisional liberty can override statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act when trial delays are evident, emphasizing the fundamental right to personal liberty.
The court emphasized that personal liberty must be prioritized over statutory restrictions in granting bail, especially when there are violations of mandatory provisions.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial can lead to bail being granted despite statutory restrictions.
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
