Allowed

Sunny Goswami v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Mar 2024CRLMB/2563/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court enlarged the petitioner on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving NDPS and Arms Act offences. The Court relied on the violation of Section 50 NDPS Act, finding that the accused was not given the statutory notice for search by an authorized officer, warranting release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each conditioned upon appearance before the trial court.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:12918]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 2563/2024 Sunny Goswami S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Goswami, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Akola Tehsil Sadar, Dist. Agra (Up), Presently R/o Kheriya Mod, Radhewali Galli, Gali No. 16 B, Brijwasi School Ke Pass, Jagner Road, Agra U.p. (At Present Lodged At Sriganganagar Jail)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Shree Kant Verma
	Mr.	Kan Singh Oad
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Saleem Khan,PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR Order

¶10

19/03/2024

¶11

This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.367/2023 registered at Police Station Jawahar Nagar, District Sriganganagar for the offences under Section 8/22 of NDPS Act & Section 3/25 of the Arms Act.

¶12

The first bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide order dated 23.08.2023.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution on

[2024:RJ-JD:12918]

[CRLMB-2563/2024]

(2 of 4)

20.07.2023, at around 6:00 P.M., SHO, Police Station Jawahar Nagar, Sriganganagar during routine patrolling of the city, on seeing suspicious activities of the present petitioner and coaccused person namely Pankaj Kumar, restrained them. During search of the bag carried by the co-accused Praveen Kumar, contraband article M.D. weighting 260 gms. was recovered. Whereas, during personal search of the present petitioner contraband article M.D. weighting 25 gms. was recovered from the right pocket of his trousers. Learned counsel submitted that since the contraband weighting 25 gms. MD was recovered from the present petitioner, thus, the recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. Learned counsel further submitted that before conducting personal search of the present petitioner no notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was given to him by the SHO, Police Station Jawahar Nagar, Sriganganagar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the procedure provided under Section 50 of the NDPS Act has to be meticulously followed looking to the stringent punishment under the NDPS Act.

¶19

Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 21.07.2023; and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to conclude; therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that at the time when the contraband article M.D. weighing 25 gms. was recovered from

[2024:RJ-JD:12918]

[CRLMB-2563/2024]

(3 of 4)

the present petitioner, he was in the company of the co-accused Praveen Kumar, from whose conscious possession contraband article MD weighing 260 gms. was recovered. Learned counsel submitted that looking to seriousness of allegations levelled against the present petitioner, the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel, thus, prayed that the present bail application may be rejected.

¶25

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents; the contraband recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner is below commercial quantity; no notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was given to the petitioner. Thus a valuable right of the petitioner to be searched by the nearest Gazetted Officer as provided under Section 50 of NDPS Act or by the Magistrate was taken away without any valid justification. It is to be noticed that the safeguards under Section 50 of the NDPS Act have been given to an accused so as to avoid false implication of an innocent person in a matter pertaining to NDPS Act. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶26

Consequently, the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Sunny Goswami S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Goswami arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.367/2023 registered at Police Station Jawahar Nagar, District Sriganganagar, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to

¶27

(4 of 4) [CRLMB-2563/2024]

¶28

[2024:RJ-JD:12918]

¶29

the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

¶30

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶31

29-mohit/-

Sunny Goswami v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunny Goswami 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

Jagdish Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Omendra Singh @ Upendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Omprakash Bishnoi Vs State of Rajasthan

Abdul Tawab Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijay Choudhary @ Bihari Vs State of Rajasthan

Hussain @ Mohammed Hussain Vs State of Rajasthan