SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN - PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JODHP
OM PRAKASH YADAV – Appellant
Versus
UOI – Respondent
CRLMB 8623/2017



Advocates:
['DN YADAV', 'AMIT SHARMAAMIT SHARMA RAJESH LALWANI', 'AMIT SHARMA', 'PP VIPUL SINGHVI']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 8623/2017

Om Prakash Yadav S/o Deepchand Yadav, B/c Yadav R/o- C/o

Ramesh Singh, New Brahmpuri Colony Behind Satpur High

School Abu Road, District Sirohi Raj. Petitioner At Present

Lodged In Judicial Custody Central Jail, Sirohi

----Petitioner

Versus

Union Of India Through Dri, Jodhpur.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr D.N.Yadav

Mr Rajesh Lalwani

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr Vipul Singhvi – Spl. P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

04/12/2018

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

learned Special Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on

record.

The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR

No.110/2017 of Police Station, Abu Road City, District Sirohi for

the offences punishable under Sections 8(C), 22, 28 and 29 of

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short

‘the NDPS Act’ hereinafter). He has preferred this bail application

under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued

that as per the prosecution story, specific intelligence regarding

manufacturing of Mephedrone - narcotic substance, was received

(2 of 5)

[CRLMB-8623/2017]

by Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,

Mumbai Zone Unit on 24.05.2015 and pursuant to that, a raid on

factory premises of M/s Rishi Mine Chem Pvt. Ltd., Abu Road was

conducted on 25.05.2015 at 09.20 hours and narcotic substance

Mephedrone weighing 218.43 kgs. was recovered and the

petitioner was arrested on spot. It is argued that while raiding the

said premises, compliance of Section 47 of the NDPS Act was not

made by the Officers of DRI. Learned counsel for the petitioner

has also argued that as per the seizure memo prepared on

25.05.2015, in all 218.43 kgs. white powered substance purported

to be Mephedrone were seized under the provisions of NDPS Act.

The said narcotic contraband was filled in 9 bags and samples

thereof weighing 25 gms. were taken from each bag, however,

surprisingly when inventory of goods seized was prepared on

26.05.2015, all 9 bags contained 218.43 kgs. of Mephedrone.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that from bare

perusal of the said inventory, it is clear that no sample was taken

out from 9 bags, otherwise in the said inventory, total weight of

Mephedrone would have been reduced.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also invited

attention of this Court towards the inventory verification report

dated 06.08.2016 prepared under Section 52A of the NDPS Act

and argued that from the said inventory, it is clear that the weight

of the Mephedrone seized on 25.05.2015 i.e. 218.43 kgs. has

been increased to 230.082 kgs. at the time of inventory

verification done on 06.08.2018.

(3 of 5)

[CRLMB-8623/2017]

Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr Yadav has

submitted that from the above discrepancies, it is clear that the

investigating agency has conducted investigation in most

irresponsible manner and taking into consideration the said

lacunae in the investigation process, the petitioner, who is in

custody from last more than three and a half years, is entitled to

be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted

that though charges were framed against the petitioner on

16.09.2017 but the trial could not be proceeded further on

account of arrest of one of the accused, against whom

supplementary charge-sheet has been filed by the DRI only in

October 2018. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner

that recently, the petitioner has suffered paralysis attack and for

the purpose of better treatment, he is required to be released on

bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued that

the petitioner has

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top