Allowed

Hanumanram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Mar 2023CRLMB/9603/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the fifth bail application of the petitioner arrested under the NDPS Act and IPC. Relying on Supreme Court precedents regarding custody duration in commercial quantity NDPS cases, the court directed the release of the petitioner on bail solely on the ground of prolonged custody and incomplete trial, subject to execution of a bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in connection with FIR No.5/2019 upon execution of a personal bond in Rs 50,000/ and sureties of Rs 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court.

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

¶1

[2023/RJJD/006808]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous V Bail Application No. 9603/2022

¶4

Hanumanram S/o Sh. Hiraram, Aged About 27 Years, Doli Kalla Teh. Pachpadra Ps Kalyanpur Dist. Barmer. (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail, Pali)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Petitioner’s Brother in Law	: Mr. Anil
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.K. Bhati, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶11

Order

¶12

17/03/2023

¶13

It is unfortunate that Advocates are not appearing and are abstaining from work pursuant to the call given by the office bearers of the Bar Association. Such non-appearance is clearly illegal and in breach of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ex. Capt. Harish Uppal Vs. Union of India & Anr. , reported in [2003 (2) SCC 45] .

¶14

Heard petitioner’s brother-in-law as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

¶15

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.5/2019 of Police Station Guda Endla, District Pali for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 of NDPS Act and 201 of the IPC. He has preferred this fifth bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶16

As per the prosecution story, narcotic contraband poppy straw weighing around 68.600 Kgs have been recovered from the

[2023/RJJD/006808]

[CRLMB-9603/2022]

(2 of 3)

custody of the petitioner. The said narcotic contraband recovered at the instance of the petitioner is above commercial quantity.

¶21

Mr. Anil, petitioner’s brother-in-law, present in person, has argued that the petitioner is in custody since 30.03.2019 and out of 22 prosecution witness, only 7 prosecution witness have been examined before the trial court. It is, thus, prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶22

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Abdul Majeed Lone Vs. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3961/2022], Amit Singh Moni Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.668/2020), Tapan Das Vs. Union of India [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5617/2021], Kulwant Singh Vs. State of Punjab [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5187/2019], Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5397/2019], Nadeem Vs. State of UP [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.1524/2022] and Mukesh Vs. The State of Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.4089/2021] has granted bail to the accused persons, against whom the allegations are of transporting or possessing narcotic contraband above commercial quantity, on the ground of custody period and taking into consideration the fact that the trial against the said accused persons will take time in completion. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has ordered for release of the accused persons who were in custody from two years to four years.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

(3 of 3)

[2023/RJJD/006808]

[CRLMB-9603/2022]

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this fifth bail application solely on the ground of custody period of the accused petitioner and keeping in view the fact that the trial against him has not been completed till date.

¶28

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this fifth bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner- Hanumanram S/o Sh. Hiraram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.5/2019 of Police Station Guda Endla, District Pali provided he executes a personal bond in a 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 appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

¶29

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶30

3-AjaySingh/-

Hanumanram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanumanram 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

Mohsin Khan @ Kallu Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhupendra @ Bhanu Vs State of Rajasthan

Shyam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Umesh Vyas Vs State of Rajasthan

Narendra Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan