HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10896/2021

Channana Ram @ Kaliya @ Chandana S/o Nawla Ram, Aged

About 34 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Nand, Barmer Rural Police Station,

Barmer, Dist. Barmer.

(Lodged In Sub Jail, Bali, Dist. Pali).

----Petitioner

Versus

State, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. V.R. Bishnoi

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. S.K. Bhati, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

Order

22/09/2021

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439

Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in judicial custody in

connection with F.I.R. No.36/2017, Police Station Nana, District

Pali, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8/15 &

8/29 of the NDPS Act.

Heard and considered arguments the advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused

the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that contraband

was recovered from an abondoned vehicle; accused-petitoner has

been implicated in this case only on the basis of the information

given by him under Section 27 of the evidence Act after arrest in

(2 of 3)

[CRLMB-10896/2021]

other case; that as per information, accused-petitioner worked

with Kheta Ram, who has been granted benefit of bail; further

stated that statement of Investigating Officer Karnidan has been

recorded as P.W.1 and he has not supported the story of

prosecution and admitted that call detail report has not been

procured by him but the same might be procured by earlier

Investigating Officer; he further stated that contraband recovered

on 04.03.2017 and same was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory

on 12.07.2021, i.e., after delay of four months.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the bail application and stated that soon before the

occurence, accused-petitioner was granted parole in other case

and he was on parole and not surrendered before the jail

authorities; when he was in absconded condition, the present

recovery was made; He further stated that investigation in regard

to petitioner was conducted by Investigating Officer-Sumer Singh

and statments of Sumer Singh are yet to be recorded.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,

particularly the fact that guidelines issued in regard to sending of

samples to the Forensic Science Laboratory is directory in nature

not mandatory; statmentd of Investigating Officer-Sumer Singh

are yet to be recorded; at the time of occurence, accused-

petitioner was absconded in other case, threfore, looking to the

totality of facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it to

be a fit case for grant of bail in favour of the accused-petitioner

and thus, the present bail application deserves to be rejected.

(3 of 3)

[CRLMB-10896/2021]

Accordingly, the instant bail application filed under Section

439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.

However, learned counsel for the appellant is free to file

fresh bail application after recording statement of the

Investigating Officer-Sumer Singh.

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J.

38-Bharti/-