SHRAVAN SINGH S/O SHRI MOOL SINGH RAJPUT vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Online)(RAJ) 29935

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J
SHRAVAN SINGH S/O SHRI MOOL SINGH RAJPUT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent

Judgement Key Points

Case Summary

High Court of Rajasthan (Jaipur Bench) granted bail to petitioner Shravan Singh in FIR No.32/2022, PS Chandwaji, Jaipur Rural, under Sections 8/21 NDPS Act. (!) [1][2]
Petitioner in custody since date of recovery (12.02.2022); charge-sheet filed, trial expected to take considerable time. (!) [6]

Petitioner's Arguments

False implication; sample drawing violated Section 52A(2) NDPS Act (required in presence and supervision of Magistrate, with certification). (!)
FSL report (05.08.2022) showed no presence of diacetylmorphine (heroin); instead contained Alprazolam, Paracetamol, Caffeine. (!)
Sample drawn 12.02.2022 but deposited at FSL on 21.02.2022, violating 72-hour deposition requirement under Standing Order 1/88. (!)
Inventory prepared after delay of over four months without explanation. (!)
Co-accused Vishnu Kanwar already granted bail by the court. (!)
Further custody not serving any purpose. (!)

Prosecution's Arguments

5.300 kg contraband smack recovered from petitioner's house; arrested at recovery site. [3]
Bail opposed due to rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act. [3]

Court's Findings and Ratio

Section 37 NDPS Act does not impose absolute embargo on bail. [5][6]
Bail assessment requires broad, prima facie satisfaction on material that accused may not be guilty; no positive finding of innocence or meticulous examination needed. [5]
Non-compliance with Section 52A(2) NDPS Act; samples drawn violating Supreme Court guidelines on procedure. [6]
Prolonged custody (since 12.02.2022) and overall circumstances justify bail, without commenting on merits. [6]

Order

Bail allowed on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, subject to trial court satisfaction. [7]
Conditions: appear before trial court on all hearing dates; no involvement in similar offences; report to police station first Monday every month until trial conclusion. [7][8]
Breach of conditions grounds for bail cancellation. [8]

Order

02/02/2024

1. The instant application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.32/2022 registered at Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur (Rural) for offence under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the work of drawing sample was not done in accordance with the provisions of sub-section 2 of Section 52A of the NDPS Act. The process of drawing of samples has to be in the presence and under the supervision of the Magistrate and the entire exercise has to be certified by him to be correct. However, there is total non- compliance of this provision of law. He placed reliance on the following judgments:- (1) Union of India vs Mohanlal & Anr : (2016) 3 SCC 3749 and (2) Mangilal vs State of Madhya Pradesh: 2023 SCC online SC 862. While referring to the FSL report dated 05.08.2022, learned counsel contends that on microchemical analysis, presence of diacetylmorphine (Heroin) could not be detected in the samples sent to FSL. As per the said report, the sample was found to contain Alpraz

Click Here to Read the rest of this document