Dismissed

Sohan Singh Rabbdasi v. State

Rajasthan HC20 Sept 2021CRLMB/10310/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. regarding NDPS charges involving commercial quantity of poppy husk, the High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the prayer for bail, holding it not fit to grant bail at the stage without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. dismissed; application preferred by the petitioner dismissed.

Sohan Singh Rabbdasi Vs State — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10310/2021

¶3

Sohan Singh Rabbdasi S/o S. Santokh Singh, Aged About 38 Years, Gogamedi Road VPO Dello Ps Vps Dello Dist. Ludhiana (Punjab).

¶4

(Presently Lodged In District Jail, Bhilwara).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ranjeet Singh Gill For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudhir Tak, Public Prosecutor

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

¶11

Order

¶12

20/09/2021

¶13

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.126/2017, registered at Police Station Pur, District Bhilwara, under Sections 8/15 & 8/29 of Narctoic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case during trial, Seizure Officer Inder Singh has been examined; in his cross examination he admits that seizure memo does not bear the signature of the accused; there is irregularity in seizing of the samples; samples were sent for examination after a delay of about 14 days. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon

¶16

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-10310/2021]

¶17

the judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case No. 1880 of 2011 “Mohan Lal vs The State of Punjab” on the point of delay of sending samples to FSL. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶19

As per prosecution story petitioner was apprehended on the spot with narcotic substance of 563-560 kg poppy husk which is in commercial quantity.

¶20

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court does not deem it fit to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner at this stage.

¶21

Accordingly, the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

¶22

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

¶23

15-rahul arya/-

Sohan Singh Rabbdasi v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohan Singh Rabbdasi v. State

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

Ramesh Kumar Dharniya Vs State of Rajasthan

Manohar Lal Dhakad @ Babu Lal Dhakad Vs State

Sanjay Vs State of Rajasthan

Geeta Devi Vs State

Raju Banjara Vs State

Luni Devi Vs State