Partly allowed

Surendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Jul 2021CRLMB/5544/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to a petitioner arrested under the NDPS Act. The court relied on a prior decision regarding procedural irregularities in sample collection of narcotics, noting rare chances of conviction due to these grounds. Bail was approved subject to a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.21/2014 under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Surendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IInd Bail Application No. 5544/2021

¶3

Surendra Singh S/o Shri Kurdaram, Aged About 48 Years, B/c Chaudhary, R/o B 12 Commercial Complex, Ranoli, Vadodara (Gujarat) At Present, R/o Ghumansar P.s. Bagad, Distt. Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present Lodge In Sub-Jail, Sumerpur)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalu Ram Bhati For Respondent(s) : Mohd. Javed Gauri, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶10

Order

¶11

12/07/2021

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶13

The petitioner(s) has/have been arrested in FIR No.21/2014 of Police Station Sanderao, District Pali for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 8/25 of NDPS Act. He/she/they has/have preferred this/these bail application(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the coaccused Mangi Lal has already been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 26.07.2018 on the ground that the Seizure Officer has not followed the requisite procedure as he has not collected samples from each 71 bags and, in fact contraband contained in all the bags was mixed and thereafter sample was drawn.

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CRLMB-5544/2021]

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance 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, it cannot be said that the narcotic contraband recovered in the matter is of commercial quantity or above. It is, thus, prayed that the petitioner may kindly be enlarged on bail.

¶18

Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and substantial grounds taken in this bail application and taking into consideration the judgment passed by this Court in Netram’s case (supra), this Court is of the opinion that there are rare chances of petitioner’s conviction and trial of the case is likely to take time, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application(s).

¶20

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the petitioner(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶21

Accordingly, this/these bail application(s) filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is/are allowed and it is directed that petitioner(s) –

¶22

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-5544/2021]

¶23

Surendra Singh S/o Shri Kurdaram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.21/2014 of Police Station Sanderao, District Pali provided he/she/they execute(s) a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his/her/their appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of

¶24

the trial.

¶25

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶26

92-mohit/-pratibha/-

Surendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra 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

Kutubdeen Vs the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Suresh Vs Narayan Lal and Ors.

Smt. Kamla Devi and Ors. Vs Dungar Lal and Ors.

Suryaveer Singh Chouhan Vs State of Rajasthan

Hanuman Vs State of Rajasthan

Dashrath Singh Vs State of Rajasthan