Allowed

Ishaq Mohd. @ Shakur v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC28 Nov 2022CRLMB/14027/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a Narcotic Drugs case. Court held it just to grant bail considering the accused was falsely implicated and FSL report found no contraband despite seizure. Bail granted with bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Accused enlarged on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Ishaq Mohd. @ Shakur Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14027/2022

¶3

Ishaq Mohd. @ Shakur S/o Sh. Mumtaj Shah, Aged About 42 Years, Thukrana, Teh. And Ps Suratgarh, Dist. Sriganganagar (Raj.). (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Sriganganagar).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshad Bhadu For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶10

Order

¶11

28/11/2022

¶12

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner Ishaq Mohd. @ Shakur S/o Shri Mumtaj Shah. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 143/2022 registered at Police Station Suratgarh City, District Sriganganagar for the offence(s) under Sections 8/22, 25 of NDPS Act.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this matter and he has been charge-sheeted on the basis of assumption only. He further submits the samples of the seized material were collected and sent to the FSL for examination. The FSL report dated 14.7.2022 reveals that the presence of Tramadol could not be detected in the sample tablets packed in the packed marked "A". Learned counsel further submits that since no contraband has been recovered from

¶14

(2 of 2)

¶15

[CRLMB-14027/2022]

¶16

the possession of the petitioner, his further incarceration would not be justifiable and thus, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. 4. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the possibility that the trial may take long time to conclude, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner, named above, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶18

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶19

68-RP/-

Ishaq Mohd. @ Shakur v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishaq Mohd. @ Shakur 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharda Devi Jalap Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhanwar Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ravindra @ Munna Vs State of Rajasthan

Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Nathuram Vs State

Sudarshan Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan