Allowed

Angrej Ali v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Apr 2023CRLMB/2258/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two petitioners charged under the NDPS Act moved for bail. The High Court observed trial delays and, relying on a recent Supreme Court decision, granted bail requiring a personal bond and sureties to the trial court until the completion of trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to execution of a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000 each to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Angrej Ali Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/011408]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2258/2023

¶4

Angrej Ali S/o Shri Ayub Khan, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Kheruwala, Tehsil Sadul Shahar, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan. (Presently Lodged At Jail, Sriganganagar)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13546/2022 Mohamad Salam @ Aslam Khan S/o Sh. Maram Khan, Aged About 36 Years, B/c Musalman, R/o Rorawali, Teh. And Dist. Hanumangarh (Raj.).

¶11

(At Present Lodged In Dist./central Jail, Sriganganagar).

¶12

----Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶15

----Respondent

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Durgesh Khatri For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, PP

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶18

Order

¶19

21/04/2023

¶20

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

¶21

The petitioners have been arrested in FIR No.339/2018 of Police Station Sadul Shahar, District Sri Ganganagar for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21 and 29 of NDPS Act. They have preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

[2023/RJJD/011408]

[CRLMB-2258/2023]

(2 of 3)

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted the earlier bail applications of the petitioners - Angrej Ali and Mohamad Salam were rejected by this Court on 06.10.2021 and 2.3.2020 respectively. It is submitted that petitioner – Angrej Ali was arrested on 22.09.2018 and petitioner – Mohamad Salam was arrested on 29.9.2018 and as per the prosecution story, 12 bottles of Win-Corex Syrup weighing 1.452 kgs containing narcotic substance codine and 150 capsules of Parvon-spas tablets containing narcotic substance tramadol alleged to have been recovered from the petitioners. It is further submitted that as per the charge sheet filed by the police, as many as 19 prosecution witnesses are to be examined, however out of which, only 11 prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial court till date.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the decision dated 28.03.2023 rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) [Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s). 915 of 2023], wherein it is observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that delay in trial can also be considered for releasing accused person on bail despite the restrictions imposed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

¶27

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 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 accused petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

[2023/RJJD/011408]

[CRLMB-2258/2023]

(3 of 3)

Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioners Angrej Ali S/o Shri Ayub Khan and Mohamad Salam @ Aslam Khan S/o Sh. Maram Khan shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.339/2018 of Police Station Sadul Shahar, District Sri Ganganagar provided each of them executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶32

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶33

60-Arun/-

Angrej Ali v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Angrej Ali 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

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Hanumanram Vs State of Rajasthan

Umesh Vyas Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay Kumar @ Sethi Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhajan Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Rameshwar Lal @ Ramu Vs State of Rajasthan