IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA ON THE 1^st OF NOVEMBER, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 46533 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

BHANWARSINGH S/O DEEPSINGH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR, R/O: GRAM BARKHEDA, DIST. : MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT (BY SHRI VIKAS JAIN, ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION MALHARGARH, DISTRICT MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS ( BY MS. BHARTI LAKKAD, GOVT. ADVOCATE)

This application coming on for order this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

1. This is the first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.270/2020 registered at Police Station Malhargarh, District Mandsaur (MP) for offence punishable under Section 8/15, 29 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in custody since 12.09.2022.

2. As per the prosecution, on 23.12.2020 on receipt of a secret information the Police found a car bearing registration no. RJ-27-CJ-4854 in an Signature Not Verified Signed by: JYOTI unattended condition at Changeri road and recovered 80 kilogram contraband dodachura from the same. The vehicle was found to be of the ownership of co-accused Narayan and upon recording of his memorandum to the effect that he had procured the contraband from the present applicant, he has been implicated and arrested for the present offence.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. Besides the memorandum of co- accused recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is no other material available on record against the applicant. There is no direct evidence linking the applicant to the present crime. No recovery has been made from the applicant. The applicant is not having any criminal antecedents. Investigation has been completed and chargesheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take a long time for its conclusion. On such grounds prayer for grant of bail to the applicant has been made.

4. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent/State submitting that in view of the quantity of contraband recovered in the present matter, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case diary. 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 is no direct evidence linking him to the present crime. The applicant is not shown to be having any criminal antecedents. Investigation has been completed and chargesheet has been filed and the applicant is in custody since 12.09.2022 and the trial is likely Signature Not Verified to take a long time for its conclusion. Thus in my opinion, the applicant is Signed by: JYOTI

11:13:23 entitled to be released on bail.

6. 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) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that they 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.

7. 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 Shilpa Signature Not Verified Signed by: JYOTI