IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA ON THE 14^th OF NOVEMBER, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 53022 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

VINOD S/O MANSINGH GUJJAR, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOR R/O VILLAGE CHANDODIYA P.S. KHACHROD DIST. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANT (BY SHRI HIMANSHU THAKUR, ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION JAORA DISTRICT RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (BY MS. BHARTI LAKKAD, GOVERNMENT 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.313/2022 registered at Police Station Jaora, District Ratlam (MP) for offence punishable under Section 8/15, 29 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in custody since

08.09.2022.

2. As per the prosecution, on receipt of a secret information the police party reached Lehsun Mandi gate, Khachrod Naka, Jaora and on 08.09.2020 Signature Not Verified Signed by: JYOTI recovered 80 kilogram contraband poppy straw from the possession of co-

accused Gowardhan and Vikas which was being transported by them in a tractor trolley of white colour which was not having any number plate. On recording of memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, to the effect that they had procured the said 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 material available against the applicant. No recovery has been made from him and there is no direct evidence linking him to the present crime. 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 huge quantity of contraband recovered in the present matter and the fact that the applicant is having two more criminal cases registered against him, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

5. I have heard the 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 does not appear to be any direct or indirect evidence linking him to the present crime. Investigation has been completed and chargesheet has been filed and the applicant is in custody since 08.09.2022 and his further custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. Thus in my opinion, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Signature Not Verified

6. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the Signed by: JYOTI

11:14:10 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 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.

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