Allowed

Sunil v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Sept 2024CRLMB/11001/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a bail application for an accused charged under NDPS, Arms, and IPC acts. The court held the Section 37 NDPS bar was not attracted and granted bail, noting similarity to a bailed co-accused lacking phone linkages.

What did the court decide?

Accused-applicant Sunil S/o Sriram enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Sunil Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:36111]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11001/2024

¶4

Sunil S/o Sriram, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Beniwalo Ki Dhani, Modathali, Police Station Jhanwar, Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.) (Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Bhagirath RayBishnoi
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Lalit Kishor Sen,P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

¶11

Order

¶12

02/09/2024

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused-applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The applicant has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 375/2023 registered at Police Station Kudi Bhagtasni, District Jodhpur for the offence(s) under Sections 8/15, 18, 29 NDPS Act, Section 3/25 (1) Arm Act, Sections 307, 353, 420, 467, 468, 471, 484, 170, 171 IPC and Section 3 PDPP Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the chargesheet has already been filed in the matter against main coaccused Dinesh Singh. He argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of information u/s 27 of the Evidence Act furnished by co-accused Dinesh Singh from whom contraband has been recovered. It is submitted that similarly situated co-accused Shersingh @ Sheru @ Sheraram has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

[2024:RJ-JD:36111]

[CRLMB-11001/2024]

(2 of 3)

18.04.2024 considering the fact that no call details of the said accused Shersingh with the main accused Dinesh Singh have been found by the police. In the present matter also, no call details of the applicant with the main accused Dinesh Singh have been found by the police and the case of the present applicant is similar to the co-accused Shersingh who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. He further submitted that prima-facie there is no evidence against the applicant attracting the bar contained under the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The applicant is in judicial custody and trial of the case is likely to take long time to conclude. Therefore, on the above submissions, learned counsel submits that the accused-applicant may be released on bail.

¶19

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application, however, admits that there is no call details of the applicant with the co-accused Dinesh Singh. 4. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and the overall facts and circumstances of the case as also the facts that admittedly, no call details of the applicant with the main accused Dinesh Singh from whom recovery has been effected, have been found by the police as mentioned in the charge-sheet also, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused-applicant is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail and primafacie, the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS is not attracted in the matter; co-accused Shersingh @ Sheru @ Sheraram has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.04.2024 passed in S.B.Criminal Misc. Bail Application

[2024:RJ-JD:36111]

[CRLMB-11001/2024]

(3 of 3)

No.3013/2024 and case of the present applicant is similar to said co-accused Shersingh; the accused is in jail and trial of the case may take long time to conclude, without commenting on the merits and demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-applicant Sunil S/o Sriram, arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned lower court for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶25

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J

¶26

7-RP/-

Sunil v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil 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

Ashish Kumar Vs Sushila Kumari Saharan

Vinod Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ankit Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gurbaj Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ram Narayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Satish Alias Chatara Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan