Dismissed

Budhram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Apr 2024CRLMB/1210/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur dismissed the bail application of the petitioner accused in an NDPS case. The court held that recovery of drugs in commercial quantity attracts Section 37 restrictions, and evidentiary discrepancies regarding site maps must wait for the trial.

What did the court decide?

The bail application filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:16583]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 1210/2024

¶4

Budhram S/o Shi Ganeshnath, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 5 Lsm Banda, Police Station Anoopgarh, District Sri Ganganagar (Raj) (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail Anoopgarh)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	D.S. Thind
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Mahpal Bishnoi,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶11

Order

¶12

18/04/2024

¶13

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are

¶14

tabulated herein below:

¶15

S.No.	Particulars of	the Case
1.	FIR Number	345/2020
2.	Concerned Police Station	Anupgarh
3.	District	Ganganagar
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act
5.	Offences added,if any	--
6.	Date of passing of impugned order	07.12.2023

¶16

It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the

[2024:RJ-JD:16583]

[CRLMB-1210/2024]

(2 of 3)

case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accusedpetitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have not been complied with. He drew attention of this Court towards the admissions made by the Seizing officer Ramu Ram Meena in his deposition wherein he admits that the place of incident that site map does not contain description of the entire area. The preperation of exhibit P12 & P11 have also been disputed. Learned counsel further argued with regard to infrigement of fundamental right as the trial is not going to be culminated despite his detention for more than three and a half years. 3. Contrary to submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. He would contend that no specific argument has been raised with regard to non compliance of any mandatory provision. It is a matter of recovery of medicinal drug and the same is in commercial quantity for which the embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would attract.

¶21

I have pondered over the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and have minutely gone through the niceties of the matter. 5. Prima facie, it is revealing that commercial quantity of medicinal drug came to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner for which embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act makes a hindrance in granting bail. As far as the question of exhibit P11 and P12, discrepancy in site memo are concerned, the same are to be appreciated at the time of final

[2024:RJ-JD:16583]

[CRLMB-1210/2024]

(3 of 3)

disposal of the trial since critical appreciation of evidence is not warranted during the trial to be done while hearing a bail plea. In this view of the matter, taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶26

Accordingly, the instant bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

¶27

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶28

13-Samvedana/-

Budhram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budhram 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

Sahiram Vs State of Rajasthan

Gurdeep Singh Vs State

Kartar Singh Vs State

Deepak Deedwania Vs Smt. Tanuja Gajrani

Subhash Chandra Vs Maniram

Pharsaram Vs State of Rajasthan