Learned counsel for the petitioner appearing through video calling stated that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case for the offence punishable under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act; no recovery was made from the accused-petitioner; and on the statement of the co-accused, the present accused-petitioner has been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel also stated that no call detail report has been placed on record along with charge-sheet. In support of his argument that on the basis of the statement of the co-accused, the accused-petitioner has been implicated in the present case,, therefore, the accused-petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail, learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgments/orders passed by the coordinate Bench/ s of this Court in the cases of Dinesh @ Kalu S/o Heeraram (Bail Application No. 2001/2020, decided on 14.05.2020) and Shahdev S/o Amilal (Criminal Revision Petition No. 1173/2019, decided on 22.11.2019). Learned counsel has also placed reliance upon the judgment/order dated 11th January, 2001 rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Abdul Rashid Vs. State of Bihar, reported in AIR 2001 SC 2422. With these submissions, learned counsel prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
