Allowed

Ram Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Nov 2018CRLMB/9154/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan granted bail to Ram Singh in a trial for offenses under Sections 8 and 21 of the NDPS Act. The court relied on the Netram judgment regarding procedural irregularities in sample mixing and testing but did not express an opinion on the merits of the charges, directing release subject to a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail on execution of personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two bond sums of Rs. 25,000/- each.

Ram Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 9154/2018

¶3

Ram Singh S/o Bhagwat Singh, Aged About 36 Years, B/c Rajput, R/o Ranawato Ka Khera, P.s. Badi Sadari, Dist. Chittorgarh (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Chittorgarh)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr Birbal Saran For Respondent(s) : Mr Ashok Upadhyaya-PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶10

Judgment / Order

¶11

15/11/2018

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

¶13

The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.141/2017 of Police Station, Bhadsoda, District Chittorgarh for the offence punishable under Section 8/21 NDPS Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is clear from the statement of PW.3 – Narendra Singh Bhati, the then SHO, Police Station, Bhadsoda that 12 bags containing poppy husk were seized by the police and the Seizure Officer first took 500 gms. of poppy husk from each bag, then he mixed the said poppy husk and thereafter took two samples from that mixture. Thus, it is clear that the Seizure Officer did not collect separate samples from each bag. It is also submitted that the I.O. has not

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLMB-9154/2018]

¶17

stated that the test by the U.N. Kit was carried out on each bag before taking small quantity of poppy husk for samples.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance

¶19

on the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Netram Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2014(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163 has argued that this Court has held that if the samples from each bag containing poppy husk/poppy straw have not been collected and test by U.N.Kit has not been conducted on each bag and if the Seizure Officer has taken out some quantity of narcotic drug from each bag and after mixing the same has taken out some portion for sample, then the same is not in conformity with the Standing Instruction No.1/88 issued by the Narcotics Control Bureau, New Delhi, particularly, Instruction No.1.7 and, as such, the accused person cannot be held guilty for possession of narcotic drugs of commercial quantity. It is also argued that no other case of similar nature is pending against petitioner. It is, thus, prayed that the petitioner may be released on bail.

¶20

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶21

Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the judgment passed by this Court in Netram’s case (supra), without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶22

Accordingly, this bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Ram Singh son of Bhagwat Singh shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.141/2017 of Police Station, Bhadsoda, District Chittorgarh provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-

¶23

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-9154/2018]

¶24

with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the

¶25

satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶26

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶27

m.asif/PS

Ram Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raje Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Chayati Vs State of Rajasthan

Nakul Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Vs State of Rajasthan

Mangilal Vs State

Pappu Lal Vs State of Rajasthan