Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 12295
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Farjand Ali, J
Shankarlal S/o Ramlal Gadri – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13264/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Anupam Gopal Vyas
For the Respondents: Mr. CS Ojha, PP
Accused's incarceration not justified without corroborative evidence; bail granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Headnote:This case involves an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for bail of the accused-petitioner, alleging wrongful incarceration based on uncorroborated confessions. The court highlights the absence of strong evidence against the petitioner and the potential for prolonged trial duration, thereby determining that bail should be granted. The issues centered on the sufficiency of evidence concerning the offences under the NDPS Act and IPC, resulting in the determination that bail is warranted given the circumstances.
Result: The bail application is allowed upon the petitioner providing a personal bond and sureties as mentioned.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction invoked under section 439 cr.p.c. for bail. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. prosecution argues against bail. (Para 3) |
| 3. discussion on the evidentiary strength of the allegations. (Para 4) |
Order
18/06/2025
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 BNSS at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
order
S.No.
Particulars of the Case
1.
FIR Number
46/2022
2.
Concerned Police Station
Aakola
3.
District
Chittorgarh
4.
Offences alleged in the FIR
Under Sections 8 /15 of NDPS Act and 307 of IPC
5.
Offences added, if any
Under Section 8 /29 of NDPS Act and Section 3/25 of Arms Act
6.
Date of passing of impugned order
19.07.2024
2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.
3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.
4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have gone through challan papers and other material available on record.
A vehicle was intercepted by the police team on
21.05.2022 in which two persons namely Bhajan Lal and Jugnu were found. They had 407.900 Kg of poppy husk in their possession. During the course of investigation, it is claimed by the prosecution that aforementioned two accused made discloser to the Investigating Officer regarding involvement of the petitioner in capacity of a person who provided the contraband to them. There is force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that except the confession made by aforementioned two accused to a police officer while in police custody, nothing is there to verify, bolster, corroborate or support their allegation and if the confession is discarded in light of Section 25 & 26 of the Indian Evidence Act , there remains nothing to insinuate the petitioner. He is behind the bars since 10.07.2024 and more than one year have elapsed. Learned counsel for the petitioner place reliance on the land mark judgment of privy counsel in case of Pulukari Kotayya Vs. Kind Emperor , AIR 1947, P.C.67 and Rabi Prakash Vs. The State of Odisha , MANU/SCOR/83201/2023 , whereby the question of embargo contained under Section 37 of NDPS Act has been elaborately discussed. There is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.
