Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J.
Aaditya – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 13690 of 2023
Decided On : 29-03-2023
Bail - NDPS Act - The court granted bail to the accused under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the lack of criminal antecedents, the joint possession of contraband by two persons, and the applicant being the breadwinner for the family.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after being in custody in connection with an NDPS Act offence. The contraband was seized from joint possession of two individuals, and the applicant claimed innocence.
Finding of the Court:
The court, considering the lack of criminal antecedents, granted bail to the applicant, emphasizing that further pretrial detention was not warranted.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail pending trial, considering the allegations and the circumstances of the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided to grant bail based on the lack of criminal antecedents, joint possession of contraband by two persons, and the applicant being the breadwinner for the family.
Final Decision: The bail application filed on behalf of the applicant stands allowed, and the applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety, with conditions to abide by during the pendency of the trial.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J. - This second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail pending the trial.
2. His first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed with liberty to renew the prayer for bail after evidence of witnesses of seizure memo vide order dated 10.02.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No.57211/2022.
3. The applicant is in custody since 13.09.2022 in connection with Crime No.391/2022, registered at P.S.-Mundi, District - Khandwa (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 8/20, 29 of NDPS Act.
4. As per the prosecution story on 13.09.2022, 5 kg contraband Ganja (Cannabis) was seized from the joint possession of Vikram Thakur and Aaditya Thakur and since then they are in custody.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has not committed any offence. He is innocent. He has falsely been implicated in this case. No contraband was seized from his possession. Applicant is Labour. He has no criminal background. Even the witnesses of seizure memo and other panchnamas prepared by police have not supported the seizure of contraband from the possession of the present applicant. Applicant is only bread winner for the family. The applicant is in judicial custody since 13.09.2022 and conclusion of the trial will taken considerable time. Therefore, it has been prayed the applicant may be released on bail.
6. Learned Counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed grant of bail to the applicant/accused but fairly submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents.
7. Having taken into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the applicant is a first offender and 5 kg of contraband is alleged to have been seized from two persons, I am of the view that it is a case in which further pretrial detention of the applicant/accused is not warranted.
8. Consequently, this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail filed on behalf of applicant stands allowed.
9. It is directed that applicant-Aaditya 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 in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his regular appearance before the concerned Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
10. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case of bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective.
11. Certified copy as per rules.
The court considered the lack of criminal antecedents, joint possession of contraband, and the applicant's role as the breadwinner for the family in granting bail under Section 439 of the Code of Cri....
Grant of bail - Search and seizer of contra bad Ganja - No antecedent of similar nature of offence - nature of allegation, quantity of contraband recovered from the possession.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances of the case and the arguments presented, without commenting on the merits of the case.
The court considered the quantity of contraband recovered and the implication based on the statement of another accused in granting bail to the applicant.
The court's decision to grant bail was based on the specific circumstances of the case, including the quantity of contraband recovered and the filing of the charge-sheet.
The decision to grant bail was based on the lack of incriminating evidence against the accused-applicant and the principle of parity with the main accused who had been enlarged on bail.
The court ruled that when the investigation is nearly complete and the accused has been in custody for a significant period, bail may be granted under reasonable conditions.
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
