Allowed

Gangaram @ Dholu v. State

Rajasthan HC4 Aug 2020CRLMB/5774/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted bail to Gangaram in an NDPS case involving less than commercial quantity, accepting the application without adjudicating merits. Other connected bail applications were listed for hearing after direction to investigate officer to produce records.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond of Rs.1L and two surety bonds of Rs.50k each, subject to appearance in trial.

Gangaram @ Dholu Vs State — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR.

¶3

¶4

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5774/2020

¶5

Gangaram @ Dholu S/o Omprakash, Aged About 19 Years, Village Rambagh, Police Station Mahajan, Tehsil Lunkaransar,

¶6

District Bikaner.

¶7

(Presently Lodged At Sub Jail Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar).

¶8

----Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

State of Rajasthan through PP.

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

Connected With

¶13

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3282/2020

Govind Chhimpa

----Petitioner

Versus

State, Through P.p.

----Respondent

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4824/2020

Mukesh Kumar

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶24

----Respondent

¶25

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5772/2020

Mahadev

----Petitioner

Versus

State, Through P.p.

----Respondent

(2 of 5)

[CRLMB-5774/2020]

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Pankaj Kumar Gupta (In Bail
	Application No. 577/2020 and 4824/2020) through VC.
	Mr. R.S. Choudhary (In Bail
	Application No. 3282/2020) through VC.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Laxman Solanki,PP.

¶34

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

¶35

Order

¶36

04/08/2020

¶37

In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5774/2020:

¶38

(Gangaram @ Dholu S/o Omprakash Vs. State of Rajasthan)

¶39

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, as an abundant caution, hearing of the cases shall be only through video conferencing.

¶40

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. 34/2020, Police Station Suratgarh Sadar, District Sriganganagar, registered for the offences under Sections 8/22 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioner appearing through video calling stated that as per the prosecution story, total 250 tablets have been recovered from the accused-petitioner, having weight of 100 grams, which is less than commercial quantity, therefore, benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner Gangaram @ Dholu.

¶42

On the contrary, learned Public Prosecutor, while opposing the bail application of the accused-petitioner, stated that he seeks

¶43

(3 of 5)

¶44

[CRLMB-5774/2020]

¶45

some time to call for the antecedents of the present accusedpetitioner.

¶46

In reply to the above submission, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he is ready to make a statement to the effect that no other case is pending against the accusedpetitioner.

¶47

Heard and considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

¶48

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly to the fact that the quantity of the recovered contraband substance is less than commercial quantity and the trial will take time, therefore, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.

¶49

Consequently, the bail application (No. 5774/2020) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Gangaram @ Dholu S/o Omprakash, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 34/2020, Police Station Suratgarh Sadar, District Sriganganagar, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) and two surety bonds of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶50

(4 of 5)

¶51

[CRLMB-5774/2020]

¶52

In S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3282/2020;

¶53

In S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4824/2020; and

¶54

In S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5772/2020:

¶55

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners appearing through video calling stated that the present accused-petitioners have wrongly been implicated in the present case only on the basis of information given by the co-assued; and nothing has been recovered from the accused-petitioners.

¶56

On the contrary, learned Public Prosecutor stated that the recovered quantity of contraband substance is commerical quantity; that 440 grams of contraband substance have been recovered from the accused-petitioner Mahadev, 1 kg. of contraband substance have been recovered from the accusedpetitioner Shanker, Govind Chhimpa and Mukesh Kumar. Therefore, all the four accused, named above, have been accused for the offence punishable under Section 8/29 of the NDPS Act.

¶57

Leraned counsel for the accused-petitioners stated that no call detail report has been taken in the present case to connect the present accused-petitioners with the alleged crime.

¶58

In reply, learned Public Prosecutor stated that call detail report has been taken by the Investigating Officer in this case during the course of investigation and to verify the factum of call detail report, learned Public Prosecutor prays that some time may be granted to him to call the Investigating Officer along with CO Diary and call detail report.

¶59

(5 of 5)

¶60

[CRLMB-5774/2020]

¶61

As requested, learned Public Prosecutor is directed to call the Investigating Officer along with CO diary and call detail report and produce the same before the Court on the next date of hearing.

¶62

List all the three bail applications on 18.08.2020, as prayed.

¶63

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J

¶64

104-107-Mohan/-

Gangaram @ Dholu v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangaram @ Dholu v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Rajasthan Vs Raj Kumar

Sunil Vs State

Bhagchand Vs State

Shankerlal Vs State

Mahipal Singh Vs State

Jagdish Vs the State of Rajasthan