Dismissed

Harnarayan S/O Shri Heeralal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 May 2023CRLMB/3629/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

During bail proceedings for a narcotics offence, the court noted the trial had progressed significantly and a large quantity of contraband was recovered. Citing the severity under the NDPS Act and the trial stage, bail was dismissed but the lower court was directed to expedite the trial.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; trial court directed to expedite trial.

Harnarayan S/O Shri Heeralal Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/011881]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.3629/2022

¶4

Harnarayan S/o Shri Heeralal, R/o Dholam, P.S. Chhipabaroad, Distt. Baran (Raj.).

¶5

(The Accused Petitioner Is In Custody At Sub Jail Chabbra, Distt Baran)

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Minakshi Jain for Mr. Sanjay Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

24/05/2023

¶14

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since last more than four years and the trial is proceeded like snails pace, so looking to the long incarceration period of the petitioner, indulgence of bail be granted to the petitioner.

¶15

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that huge quantity of contraband i.e. 4 Quintal and 20 Kilograms doda chura afeem / poppy straw has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner which is much more than the commercial quantity. Counsel submits that as per calendar of the charge-sheet there are 19 witnesses and submits that almost all the witnesses have been recorded and trial is at fag end, so the petitioner is not entitled to get indulgence of bail.

[2023/RJJP/011881]

[CRLMB-3629/2022]

(2 of 2)

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record.

¶20

Perusal of the documents available on the record of this case indicates that as per the calendar of charge-sheet the prosecution is supposed to record the statements of 19 witnesses and till 10.02.2021 statements of 11 witnesses were recorded. On asking the counsel for the petitioner about the status of trial, on instructions, counsel for the petitioner made a statement that in all 19 witnesses have been examined. Since the matter is at its fag end and looking to the fact that huge quantity of contraband has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner and looking to the rider contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to accept the bail application and the same is accordingly dismissed.

¶21

However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial looking to the incarceration period of the petitioner.

¶22

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶23

KuD/1

Harnarayan S/O Shri Heeralal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harnarayan S/O Shri Heeralal 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

Lekhraj S/O Shri Gomda Vs State of Rajasthan

Lekhraj S/O Gomda Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shahid Son of Shri Ayub Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahesh Prakash Sen S/O Shri Madan Lal Sen Vs the State of Rajasthan

Karamveer Singh S/O Shri Rajveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Basanti Vs Dy Conservator of Forest and Anr.