Dismissed

Harish v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 Mar 2022CRLMB/508/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Deendhra Kachhawaha dismissed a third bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner, accused under the NDPS Act for recovery of poppy husk, argued that deducting plastic bag weight reduced the contraband to just above the commercial quantity limit. The Court rejected the application, holding it not a fit case for bail at that stage.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; petitioners allowed to file fresh bail application after recording statement of seizure officer.

Harish Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. III Bail Application No. 508/2022

¶3

Harish S/o Shri Satya Narain, Aged About 22 Years, B/c Dadhich Brahmin, R/o Palasani, Dangiawas Police Station, Jodhpur, District Jodhpur. (Lodged In Dist. Jail, Chittorgarh).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B. Ray Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

¶10

Order

¶11

05/03/2022

¶12

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 the F.I.R. No.100/2021 of Nikumbh Police Station, District Chittorgarh for the offence punishable under Sections 8/15 of the NDPS Act.

¶13

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that first bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 13.07.2021 on the ground that the huge quantity of 52 kgs and 300 grams of poppyhusk was recovered from the petitioner; thereafter, on 09.09.2021, second bail application was dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file fresh after filing of charge-sheet. Now, chargesheet has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further stated that 52 kgs 300 grams poppy-husk was recovered in four

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CRLMB-508/2022]

¶17

plastic bags and as per page No.22 of the charge-sheet, weight of one plastic bag is 100 grams, therefore, if 400 grams weight of four plastic bags are reduced from the total contraband then the contraband recovered will remain 51 kgs 900 grams which is marginally above to minimum limit of commercial quantity. Hence, with these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.

¶18

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶19

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly to the fact that the first bail application of the accused petitioner was rejected on the ground that 52 kgs 300 grams poppy-husk was recovered from the petitioner, therefore, Coordinate Bench of this Court was not inclined to release the petitioner on bail and simply because the weight of plastic bags is 400 grams but also after reducing the same, the total quantity still remains 51 kgs 900 grams whereas, the commercial quantity of poppy husk is 50 kgs, therefore, in view of the above, without expressing any opinion on merit/demerit of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case to grant benefit of bail to the accused-petitioner at this stage.

¶20

Accordingly, the present bail application preferred by the petitioner - Harish S/o Shri Satya Narain, under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.

¶21

However, petitioner is free to file fresh bail application after recording the statement of seizure officer.

¶22

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J

¶23

24-Arvind/-

Harish v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish 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

Mahendra Kumar Vs State

Iqbal Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharmendra Vs State

Lokesh @ Sheru Mali Vs State

Prahlad Ram Vs State

Mohammed Irfan Vs State