Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ashok Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2023/Rjjd/004129) on 6 February, 2023

Author:
Vinit Kumar Mathur

Bench:
Vinit Kumar Mathur

[2023/RJJD/004129]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 10028/2022

Ashok Kumar S/o Munnalal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o RCP
Colony, Ward No. 1, Sri Vijaynagar, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, Raj.
(Presently are Lodged At Sub Jail, Anupgarh Dist. Sri
Ganganagar).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 8678/2021
Abhishek Kumar S/o Sh. Hari Narayan, Aged About 24 Years, B/c
Brahmin, R/o Ward No.1, Sri Vijaynagar, Dist. Sriganganagar.
(Presently Lodged At Sub Jail, At Anoopgarh).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through PP
----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Chandra Bishnoi
Mr. Navneet Singh Birkh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gouri, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

06/02/2023

The present second bail applications have been filed under

Section 439
of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners, who are in

custody in connection with F.I.R. No.750/2019, Police Station

Anupgarh, Sangria, District Sri Ganganagar, for the offence under

Sections 8
/
,
,
of NDPS Act.

(Downloaded on 07/02/2023 at 09:38:41 PM)

[2023/RJJD/004129] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10028/2022]

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material

available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that after the

rejection of the first bail application of the petitioners on

11.09.2020, the statement of Seizure Officer has been recorded

as PW-1. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that

as per the statement of the Seizure Officer, the procedure for

search and seizure as per the
NDPS Act
has not been followed.

To buttress their contention, learned counsel for the

petitioners have relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court passed in the cases of
Sanjeev & Anr. Vs. State

of Himachal Pradesh
reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 267

and State of Punjab Petitioner Vs. Balbir Singh Respondent

reported in AIR 1994 Supreme Court 1872.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that 3

boxes were recovered from the car, however, the samples from all

the three boxes have not been sent for FSL. Learned counsel also

submit that in the statement, it has come on record that their cars

were stopped by the seizure/raiding party. However, it has come

on record that the contraband has been recovered/intercepted

while it was fleeing from the place of recovery/interception. They,

therefore, pray that the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail applications.

I have considered the submissions made at the bar and have

gone through the relevant record of the case including the

(Downloaded on 07/02/2023 at 09:38:41 PM)

[2023/RJJD/004129] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10028/2022]

statement of PW-1-Motaram, who is the Seizure Officer in the

present case.

Admittedly, huge quantity of contraband drugs have been

recovered from the vehicle of the petitioners in which both the

petitioners were present. As far as the recovery of the contraband

drugs from the vehicle and from the possession of the petitioners

is concerned, there are no contradictory statement of any witness,

who has appeared before the trial court so far. The factum of

recovery from the possession and from the car in which the

petitioners were present is conclusively made out from the record

placed before this Court and the statements made before the trial

court.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

of the case and considering the fact that huge quantity of

contraband drugs have been recovered in the present case and

looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not

inclined to grant bail under
Section 439
Cr.P.C. to the petitioners

at this stage.

Accordingly, the present second bail applications preferred by

the petitioners under
Section 439
Cr.P.C. are dismissed.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
56-57-Shahenshah/-

(Downloaded on 07/02/2023 at 09:38:41 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)