The High Court examined a third bail application filed by a petitioner in judicial custody charged under the NDPS Act. The court rejected the plea for release.
Bail application dismissed. Trial Court directed to expedite the trial.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10712/2022
Sanjay @ Sri Ram
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2970/2022 Anil Kumar S/o Sh. Bhakhara Ram, Aged About 22 Years, Jivoniyo Ki Dhani, P.s. Gudamalani, Dist. Barmer. (Presently Lodged In Sub Jail, Barmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) |
: Mr. VijayRajBishnoi : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi,PP |
|---|
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
21/11/2022
Bail Application No. 10712/2022
List the matter after four weeks, as prayed.
Bail Application No. 2970/2022
The present third 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.60/2020, Police Station Bagoda, District Jalore registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 and 29 of the NDPS Act.
(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-10712/2022]
The first bail application was dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 26.08.2021 and second bail application was dismissed with liberty to file afresh after recording the statement of Investigating Officer vide order dated 11.11.2021 respectively.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now Investigating Officer has been examined before the trial Court. No recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner and he has merely been arrested on the basis of statement of coaccused recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. The petitioner is in the judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time. Therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
I have considered the arguments advanced before me and gone through the material available on record.
Looking to the fact that the recovered contraband is commercial quantity and as many as thirty-three other cases have been registered against the petitioner, therefore, no case is made out for grant of bail to the petitioner.
Hence, the instant third bail application is hereby dismissed. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
91-92-Rashi/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner already in judicial custody for narcotics offences given the commercial quantity of contraband and multiple cases against him.
Whether the fact that recovery was not made from the petitioner's possession and arrest was based on co-accused statement is sufficient to grant bail.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Sanjay @ Sri Ram
Anil Kumar
State Of Rajasthan
Manoj Kumar Garg
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
