Second bail application allowed. Court relied on Netram case regarding improper sampling of poppy straw bags violating NBC standards as ground to grant bail without expressing view on case merits.
Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.
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.
[2023/RJJD/006798]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No. 2776/2023
Narendra Kumar S/o Ranjeetram Vishnoi, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Vishnoiyo Ka Bas Khetolai Thana Lathi, District Jaisalmer (Raj.).
(Presently lodged in District Jail, Chittorgarh).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr. Ram Narayan - nephew of petitioner Ms. Ravina – daughter of petitioner
For Respondent : Mr. S.K. Bhati, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Order
17/03/2023
Heard Mr. Ram Narayan and Ms. Ravina, nephew and daughter of the petitioner respectively present in person, as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.
The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.8/2018 of Police Station Bhesrodagarh, District Chittorgarh for the offences punishable under Section 8/15 NDPS Act. He has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Mr. Ram Narayan and Ms. Ravina, nephew and daughter of the petitioner respectively present in person, have submitted that the petitioenr is in custody from the date of incident i.e. 18.01.2018. It is also submitted that as per the prosecution story, the police have recovered 5176.190 kgs. of poppy straw from a
[2023/RJJD/006798]
[CRLMB-2776/2023]
(2 of 4)
truck, which was dirven by the petitoner, and out of those poppy straw, 3858.400 kgs. of poppy straw was stuffed in 174 bags whereas 1317.790 kgs. of poppy straw was found scatterd in the truck. It is further submitted that the Seizure Officer has prepared a recovery memo, in which, it is mentioned that out of thouse 174 bags, 100 gms. of poppy straw were taken out from each bag then mixed the same and thereafter sampes were taken out from those mixture. It also mentioned that from the scattered poppy straw, one sample was taken out.
Mr. Ram Narayan and Ms. Ravina, nephew and daughter of the petitioner respectively present in person, have submitted that after rejection of first bail application of the petitioner by this Court on 05.08.2019, the statements of Seziure Officer – Bhanwar Singh Rathore have been recorded before the trial court as PW-4 on 19.09.2019 and thereafter on 23.09.2019 and from those statements it is clear that 174 bags containing poppy straw were seized by the police and the Seizure Officer first took 100 gms of poppy straw from each bag then he mixed the said poppy straw and thereafter took samples of 500 gms each from that mixture. Thus, it is clear that the Seizure Officer did not collect separate samples from each bag. It is also submitted that the S.O. has not stated that the test by the U.N. Kit was carried out on each bag before taking small quantity of poppy straw for samples.
Mr. Ram Narayan and Ms. Ravina, nephew and daughter of the petitioner respectively present in person, 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
[2023/RJJD/006798]
[CRLMB-2776/2023]
(3 of 4)
have 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.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, substantial grounds taken in this bail application, taking into consideration the judgment passed by this Court in Netram’s case (supra) and keeping in view the fact that trial of the case is likely to take time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Narendra Kumar S/o Ranjeetram Vishnoi shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.8/2018 of Police Station Bhesrodagarh, District Chittorgarh provided he executes 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
(4 of 4)
[2023/RJJD/006798]
[CRLMB-2776/2023]
appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing
and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
Abhishek Kumar S.No.12
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving narcotics offences where sampling procedures map to Standing Instruction No.1/88 issues.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Netram Vs. State of RajasthanRelied on¶22
2014(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Narendra Kumar S/o Ranjeetram Vishnoi
State Of Rajasthan
VIJAY BISHNOI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
