MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan, J.
Vijay Barman - Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh - Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 30538 of 2020
Decided On : 04-09-2020
Bail - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 - The court granted bail to the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the applicant's involvement in a case related to the possession and transportation of contraband substance Ganja, and the present situation of widespread Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19).
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was seeking bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with a case involving the possession and transportation of contraband substance Ganja. The applicant had been in jail since 8.8.2020, and the prosecution alleged that the applicant had kept a co-accused in his residence for one week, knowing that the co-accused was absconding and the police were in search of him.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the arguments from both parties and the act of the applicant, granted bail to the applicant, taking into account the present situation of widespread Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19). The court directed the applicant to furnish a personal bond and a solvent surety for his regular appearance before the trial court, with the condition that he shall remain present during the trial and abide by the conditions under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail in a case related to the possession and transportation of contraband substance Ganja, considering the allegations against the applicant and the present situation of widespread Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19).
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the applicant's involvement in the case, the arguments presented by both parties, and the present situation of widespread Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19). The court also imposed conditions for the applicant's release on bail.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the applicant, directing him to furnish a personal bond and a solvent surety for his regular appearance before the trial court, with the condition that he shall remain present during the trial and abide by the conditions under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. The order was effective till the end of the trial, with a provision that it shall become ineffective in case of bail jump.
JUDGMENT
Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan, J. - Heard on this first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail.
2. T h e applicant is in jail since 8.8.2020 in connection with Crime No.687/2020, registered at Police Station-Ghamapur, District-Jabalpur for offence under Section 8/20, 27A of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that, the police received an intimation that two co-accused persons namely Neelesh Burman and Bharat Burman were coming on a motor-cycle having contraband substance Ganja.
4. When the police intercepted the motor-cycle, co-accused Bharat Burman fled away from the spot but co-accused Neelesh Burman was detained and 5 kgs Ganja was seized from his possession. Co-accused Neelesh Burman informed the police that co-accused Tabal Singh provided railway ticket and other facilities to them for transportation of Ganja from Chhatisgarh. Coaccused Neelesh Burman further informed that they had to give money to coaccused Tabal Singh after selling the contraband substance. During investigation, this fact also came on record that the applicant Vijay Burman kept co-accused Bharat Burman, who was involved in carrying contraband substance illegally, in his residence for one week, knowing fully well that Bharat Burman is absonding and police is in search of him, therefore, he is also made an accused in the case.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case. Co-accused Bharat Burman is a relative of the applicant. Though it is alleged against the applicant that he kept co-accused Bharat Burman in his residence for one week but the applicant had no knowledge that Bharat Burman is absconding or the police is in search of him. The applicant has no involvement in the case, therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is arrested on 8.8.2020 and since then he is in jail. Trial will take considerable time for its disposal. Looking to the present situation of widespread of Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19), it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail.
6. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State has opposed the application. He submits that the applicant kept co-accused Bharat Burman in his residence for one week, knowing fully well that Bharat Burman is absconding and the police is in search of him. Prima facie offence punishable under Section 27A of NDPS Act is made out against the applicant, therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on considering the rival contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and act of the applicant and also looking to the present situation of widespread of Novel Corona Virus (Covid-19), this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail.
8. It is directed that applicant Vijay Burman shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his regular appearance before the trial Court with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
9. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
10. Jail authorities and State Government are directed to follow the guidelines issued by the Health Ministry in the wake of Novel Corona Virus, before and after releasing the applicant.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.