IN THE HIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 11.06.2025 + BAIL APPLN. 1136/2025 RAVINDER BHUIYAN .....Applicant versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Applicant : Mr. Mohit Yadav, Adv.

For the Respondent :Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for the State with SI Jitender, PS Sarai Rohilla Rly. Station withIO/SI Vinod Kumar, DIU/Rohini.

CORAM HON’BLE MR JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

JUDGMENT

1. The present application is filed seeking regular bail in FIR No. 41/2022 dated 26.12.2022, registered at Police Station Sarai Rohilla, for offence under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘NDPS Act’). Chargesheet has already been filed against the applicant for the offence under Section 18 of the NDPS Act and Sections 147/179 of The Railways Act, 1989.

2. It is alleged that on 26.12.2022, the complainant, namely, SI Rohit Kumar Rana, who was patrolling at Platform No.2-3 at Shakur Basti Railway Station, noticed two persons sitting on a bench who, upon seeing the police officials, started walking speedily. It is alleged the said suspected persons were detained after a brief chase.

Signature Not Verified

3. It is alleged that the applicant had a white bag in his hand which also had two transparent polythene bags in it. It is alleged that 3.086 Kg of Opium was recovered from the said polythene bags.

4. It is alleged that co-accused Ravinder was holding a saffron gamchha(towel) in which some heavy items were tied in a knot. It is alleged that on checking, it was found that the towel had two transparent polythene bags. It is alleged that a total of 2.330 Kg of Opium was recovered from the same.

5. It is the prosecution’s case that the accused persons stated in their disclosure statements that they used to work as labourers, however, they did not earn enough to fulfill their requirements They stated that they had been tasked to deliver the contraband to a man in Bathinda, Punjab by one person, namely, Vinod Paswan. It is alleged that Vinod Paswan had given the contraband to the accused persons on 25.12.2022 near Bus Stand of Hunter Ganj, Jharkhand. Thereafter, the accused persons had travelled to Delhi where they were intercepted by the police officials.

6. The bail application filed by the present applicant before the learned Trial Court was dismissed on 03.02.2025.

7. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has deep roots in the society and has clean antecedents.

8. He submitted that the applicant is the sole bread earner in his family and belongs to lower strata of the society.

9. He submitted that the investigation in the present case is complete and chargesheet has been filed, however, the charges are yet Signature Not Verified to be framed. He stated that the prosecution has named 15 witnesses and the trial is not likely to be completed in near future.

10. He submitted that the search and seizure, in the present case, is also riddled with anomalies. He submitted that although the recovery was effected in a public place, no independent witness was joined by the prosecution and no photography or videography was done either.

11. He further submitted that co-accused Vinod has already been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 25.04.2024.

12. Per Contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (‘APP’) for the State opposed the grant of any relief to the applicant in the present matter and submitted that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature since commercial quantity of illegal substance (Afeem) weighing 3.086 Kg has been recovered from the applicant.

13. He submitted that in the present case the recovery has been effectuated directly from the applicant.

ANALYSIS

14. It is settled law that the Court, while considering the application for grant of bail, has to keep certain factors in mind, such as, whether there is a prima facie case or reasonable ground to believe that the accused has committed the offence; circumstances w