2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 343
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
ON THE 16th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 42845 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
DHARMENDRA S/O KAILASH JI SAHU, AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABORER 9
KUMAWATPURA, SOORAJPOL, UDAIPUR,
RAJASTHAN (RAJASTHAN)
.....APPLICANT
(ABHISHEK RATHORE, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE
STATION JAWAD DISTRICT NEEMUCH
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI RAHUL SOLANKI, GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR STATE)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Abhishek Rathore,Advocate General
ORDER
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.193/2022, registered at Police Station Jawad, district Neemuch, for offence punishable under Section 18/15 and 29 of NDPS Act.
3. The applicant is in custody since 30.4.2022.
4. As per prosecution, on 28.4.2022 on receipt of a secret information the police of police station Jawad carried out a blockage and apprehended co-
- accused Kuldeep Singh Sikh while he was travelling in a white coloured car bearing registration No.RJ 27 CC 3012 and recovered 56 Kgs. contraband Doda Chura from his possession which was being transported by him in four plastic black bags. On recording of his memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to the effect that he was transporting the said contraband for being supplied to the present applicant, he has been implicated and arrested for the present offence.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Beside the memorandum of co-accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is no other material on record against the applicant. No recovery has been made from him and there is no direct evidence linking him to the present case. The applicant is not having any criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act. On such grounds, prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and has prayed for rejection of the application.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case diary.
8. The implication of the applicant appears to be solely 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 there does not appear to be any direct evidence linking him with the present case. Investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed and the applicant has remained in custody since 30.4.2022 and the possibility of the trial taking a long time for its conclusion cannot be ruled out. Thus in my opinion, the applicant deserves to be enlarged 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/-
- 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 SS/-