IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Nandita Dubey, J.
Rajendra Prasad Rajbade – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 52320 of 2022
Decided On : 17-03-2023
Bail - NDPS Act - The court granted bail to the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. considering the custody period and the fact that the co-accused had already been enlarged on bail, without adverting to the merits of the case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for being in custody in connection with an NDPS Act offence since 21.10.2022, where 66.950 kg. Ganja was seized from a stationary vehicle registered in the applicant's name.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application, directing the applicant to furnish a personal bond and comply with certain conditions, considering the custody period and the fact that the co-accused had already been enlarged on bail.
Issues: Bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for NDPS Act offence, custody period, and involvement of co-accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court granted bail to the applicant without adverting to the merits of the case, considering the custody period and the fact that the co-accused had already been enlarged on bail.
Final Decision: The applicant was granted bail on furnishing a personal bond and complying with specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Nandita Dubey, J. - This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.
2. The applicant is in custody since 21.10.2022 in connection with Crime No.449/2022 registered at P.S. Chachai, District Anuppur for the offence punishable under Sections 8/20B of NDPS Act.
3. As per the prosecution,66.950 kg. Ganja was seized from a stationary vehicle by the police. It is stated that the driver ran away from the spot. During investigation, on the basis of registration of the vehicle, the present applicant was arrested. He was found to be the registered owner of that vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated only on the basis that the vehicle was registered in his name. It is stated that the co-accused who is also the relative of applicant has taken the vehicle from him for purchasing the vegetables as their own vehicle has broken down. It is stated that the said vehicle is still parked outside the house of the present applicant since 13.10.2022. It is further stated that the applicant has no past criminal antecedent. He is under custody since 21.10.2022 and the trial would take considerable time to conclude. It is also pointed out that co-accused Dholaram @ Prakash has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.58698/2022 by order dated 3rd of February, 2023.
5. Learned PL has opposed the bail application. However,the facts have been verified by the learned PL appearing for the State. As per the report, the pick up vehicle was standing outside the house of the present applicant since 13.10.2022 which substantiate the story of the present applicant.
6. Considering the custody period and the fact that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail,without adverting to the merits of the case, this application is allowed.
7. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for his appearance on all the dates given by the concerned Court. It is further directed that the applicant shall also comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
8. The applicant shall mark his presence on 1st of every month before the Police Station-Chachai, District-Anuppur. In case if the applicant misses out a single appearance, this bail order will stand cancelled automatically.
9. It is further made clear that in case if the applicant is found involved in any other offence during the pendency of the trial, then too this bail order will stand cancelled automatically and the concerned Court will be at liberty to take him into custody.
10. Any attempt made by the applicant to influence or threaten the witnesses, directly or indirectly, shall also entail cancellation of this bail order.
11. Let a copy of this order be also supplied to learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State for information and compliance.
12. Certified copy as per rules.
The court may grant bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. considering the custody period and the status of co-accused, without adverting to the merits of the case.
The admissibility of evidence and the requirement of direct evidence to establish connection with the crime are crucial in bail applications.
The ownership of the vehicle used for transporting contraband and the presence of the accused at the time of the incident are crucial factors in determining bail applications under the NDPS Act.
The court may grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C based on factors such as lack of criminal history and readiness to abide by specified conditions, without commenting on the merits of the case.
Event though the applicant has 15 other criminal cases registered against him, he has only two cases coming under the NDPS Act registered against him. In those cases, he has been granted bail because....
Regular bail may be granted where continued detention is not warranted, even with prior similar offenses.
Granting bail based on concerns over alleged false recovery and lengthy trial process under N.D.P.S. act
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 can grant bail based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
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.