Order

These second applications for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.247/2024, registered at Police Station Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh, for offences under Sections 8/15 and 29 of NDPS Act.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the contraband (poppy husk/straw), weighing 840.445 kgs, was recovered from the conscious and exclusive possession of the co-accused, Ram Lal. It was further submitted that the petitioners have been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of the disclosure statements of the said co-accused.

Drawing the attention of this Court towards the statements of the Investigating Officer (PW-2) recorded before the competent criminal Court, learned counsel submitted that the Investigating Officer has categorically stated that apart from the disclosure statements of co-accused Ram Lal, no direct or circumstantial evidence was found during the course of investigation indicating the involvement of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged offence.

Learned counsel further submitted that the co-accused, Banshi Lal (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10045/2025), has already been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.09.2025.

Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody and the trial is likely to take a considerable time; therefore, they deserve to be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail applications and submitted that the Investigating Officer (PW-2), during his examination-in-chief before the competent criminal court, stated that call detail records between the petitioners and co-accused Ram Lal were obtained during the course of investigation. Thus, at this stage, it cannot be said that the petitioners have been falsely implicated or that they had no connection with the co-accused.

In rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that although the Investigating Officer (PW-2) mentioned during his examination-in-chief that call detail records had been obtained, he categorically admitted during cross-examination that no such call details were actually procured from the concerned telecom companies. It was reiterated that since the contraband was not recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners, they deserve to be enlarged on bail.

Having considered the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case, and particularly the fact that the contraband was not recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioners, and that co-accused Banshi Lal has already been granted bail, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

Consequently, the present second bail applications under Section 483 BNSS (corresponding to Section 439 Cr.P.C.) are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners —

(1) Dinesh @ Kalu S/o Heera Lal

and

(2) Shivlal S/o Shri Vardichandra,

arrested in connection with FIR No. 247/2024 registered at Police Station Chhoti Sadari, District Pratapgarh shall be released on bail, if not required in any other case, upon each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court, for their appearance before the said court on each and every date of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till the conclusion of the trial.

It is, however, made clear that the observations made herein are only for the limited purpose of adjudication of the present bail applications, and the learned trial court shall not be influenced by the same while deciding the case on merits.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document