ORDER

1. They are heard. Perused the case diary /challan papers.

2. This is the First application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as the applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.54/2022 registered at Police Station Ringnod, District Ratlam (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 8/15, 29 of N.D.P.S. Act.

3. The applicant is in custody since 20.02.2022.

4. As per the prosecution, on receipt of a secret information on 18.02.2022 the Police reached Jai Bhawani Dhaba owned by co-accused Rohit Banchhda.

On seeing them present applicant who was also present along with the co-

accused ran away taking advantage of the darkness. Thereafter on search total 60 Kg. 500 gm. Contraband Dodachura (poppy straw) was recovered from the Jai Bhawani Dhaba which was kept in three plastic bags. Eventually the applicant was arrested and on the basis of memorandum of co-accused Hansraj to the effect that the applicant was also along with the other co-accused and had run away on seeing the Police, the applicant has been implicated and arrested for the present offence.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no evidence on record directly linking the applicant to the present case. No recovery has been made from him and he has been implicated solely on the basis of memorandum of co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The Dhaba from where the recovery has been made is stated to have been owned by co-

accused Rohit Banchhda. The applicant is in custody since 20.09.2022 and his further custodial interrogation is not necessary. On such grounds prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made.

6. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent/State submitting that in view of the material available against the applicant he is not entitled to be released on bail. It is further submitted that applicant is having two criminal antecedents.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case diary.

8. The implication of the applicant appears to be on the basis of memorandum of co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

No recovery has been made from the applicant and the Dhaba from where recovery has been made belongs to co-accused Rohit Banchhda. There does not appear to be any direct evidence linking the applicant to the present case.

Thus, in my opinion, applicant deserves to be released on bail.

9. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial 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) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

10. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy as per rules.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE ns