HIGH COURT OF DELHI
KALE RAM @ KALU RAM – Appellant
Versus
NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU – Respondent
BAIL APPLN.-3045/2019
BAIL APPLN. 3045/2019 Page 1 of 6
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Reserved on:
08.02.2022
Pronounced on:
10.03.2022
+
BAIL APPLN. 3045/2019
KALE RAM @ KALU RAM
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. A.K. Sahu, Advocate with
petitioner produced from judicial
custody.
Versus
NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU
.....Respondent
Through:
Mr. Subhash Bansal, Sr. St. Counsel
with Mr. Shashwat Bansal, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
O R D E R
10.03.2022
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR,J.
1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under section 439 of Cr.P.C.
for grant of regular bail in SC.No.8605 of 2016 under Sections 20 & 29
NDPS ACT registered at Police Station NCB.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on secret information accused
Raghav Sehajpal, Krishan Chand and Ram Lal were apprehended and from
the possession of accused Raghav 220 gm of charas was recovered and two
parcels containing 399 and 925 gm of charas were recovered from Kishan
Chand and Rs. 65000/- were recovered from accused Ram Lal. It is further
This is a digitally signed Judgement.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000906
BAIL APPLN. 3045/2019 Page 2 of 6
alleged that accused persons in their statements under Section 67 NDPS Act
admitted their involvement. It is further alleged that accused Raghav
Sehajpal in his statement under Section 67 of NDPS Act has disclosed the
name of the present petitioner and his mobile number. It is further alleged
that co-accused Raghav disclosed that he used to get the contraband through
Kale Ram (petitioner herein) through conductors and drivers who sometimes
used to give money in cash and sometimes used to deposit money in HDFC
bank accounts. It is further alleged that many transactions were found to
have taken place between accused Raghav and petitioner Kale Ram and
accused/petitioner Kale Ram disclosed in his statement under Section 67 of
NDPS Act that he gave five packets to Kishan Chand and Ram Lal with
instructions to give the packets to Raghav Sehejpal.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned senior
standing counsel for the respondent-NCB. I have also perused the status
report and the records of this case.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner is in custody since 14.03.2015. It is further submitted by learned
counsel for the petitioner that co-accused - Raghav Sehajpal and Ram Lal
are on regular bail. He further submitted that the petitioner did not possess
any contraband, and he is charged with conspiracy with co-accused. It is
further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner
was arrested on the disclosure statement of the co-accused and has been
falsely implicated. He further submitted that the petitioner has deep roots in
This is a digitally signed Judgement.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000906
BAIL APPLN. 3045/2019 Page 3 of 6
the society and has family to support. Learned counsel for the petitioner
further submitted that as per the allegations in the complaint, the element of
conspiracy with the other co-accused person is missing. He further
submitted that the bank slips which are exhibited in the court are not bearing
the signature of co- accused Raghav and different signatures are appearing
on them. He further submitted that there is no evidence to show that the
amount of Rs.65,000/- which according to the prosecution was deposited by
co-accused Raghav Sehajpal in the account of petitioner was in relation to
sale and purchase of contraband.
5. On the other hand, it is sub