The court grants bail where no contraband was recovered from the accused, highlighting false implication as a critical factor.

Order

17/06/2025 This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.01/2025 registered at Police Station Vivek Vihar, District Jodhpur for offences under Section 8/15 and 29 of the NDPS Act .

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the SHO, Police Station Kudi Bhagtasani received a secret information that contraband (poppy husk/straw) greater than commercial quantity was concealed by the co-accused Ramesh S/o Shivlal in an open place (Bada) near his house. The police acting upon the said information reached the open place (Bada) situated near the house of the petitioner and recovered contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 1510.940 kgs. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case without there being any direct/cicumstantial evidence available on record indicating his involvement in commission of the alleged crime. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery of narcotic contraband was made from the conscious possession of the petitioner and the co-accused persons namely Satyanarayan and Mahipal have already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 28.11.2024 and 13.02.2025 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.10578/2024 and

15438/2024 respectively.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that since the recovered contraband is greater than the commercial quantity, the benefit of bail may not be extended to the petitioner. However, learned Public Prosecutor does not refute the fact that there are no criminal cases pending against the present petitiolner.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case; considering that the alleged recovered narcotic contraband has not been recovered from the active and conscious possession of the present petitioner; the challan of the case has already been presented; there are no cases of similar nature pending against the present petitioner; the co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court; without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.