The Court granted bail to the petitioner in an NDPS Act case, finding that the twin conditions of Section 37 were satisfied due to long detention, lack of attributable delay, and co-accused being released on bail.
Bail granted on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JD:24271]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 2564/2024
Raj Singh @ Raja Singh S/o Nupa Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Munda, Police Station Hanumangarh Town, Tehsil And Dist. Hanumangarh (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Hanumangarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
28/05/2024
This 2nd application for bail has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.260/2021 Police Station Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh, for the offences under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, a specific information was received by Shri Laxman Singh, SHO of Police Station Hanumangarh Town, that the huge quantity of contraband (poppy husk/straw) has been kept in the house of the present petitioner. Acting upon the said information, a team of Police Station Hanumangarh Town raided the house of the present petitioner. During the search, the police team recovered contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 57 kgs. in three sacks. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.05.2021 and till date out of 21 cited
[2024:RJ-JD:24271]
[CRLMB-2564/2024]
(2 of 3)
prosecution witnesses, statements of only 6 prosecution witnesses have been recorded before the competent criminal court. Learned counsel submitted that there is nothing available on record to indicate that delay in trial is attributable to the present petitioner or the petitioner is using any delay tactics in the present matter.
In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the cases of Rabi Prakash Vs. State of Orisa (Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.4169/2023 and Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).915 of 2023 .
Learned counsel further submitted that co-accused persons namely Lakhvinder Singh @ Lakha (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.14981/2022) and Sandeep (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.8038/2023) have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 10.05.2023 and 12.09.2023 respectively.
Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.05.2021 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
Per Contra , learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that no case of similar nature is pending against the present petitioner; co-accused persons namely Lakhvinder Singh @ Lakha (S.B.
[CRLMB-2564/2024]
[2024:RJ-JD:24271]
(3 of 3)
Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.14981/2022) and Sandeep (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No.8038/2023) have already been enlarged on bail by this Court; the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.05.2021 and there is nothing available on record to establish that delay in trial is attributable to the present petitioner. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner involving himself in a case of similar nature or fleeing away from justice, in case, he is enlarged on bail by this court.
In the prima facie opinion of this court the twin condition enumerated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is duly satisfied in the present case and therefore, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the 2nd bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused – petitioner Raj Singh @ Raja Singh S/o Nupa Singh, shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.260/2021 Police Station Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh, 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 trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
28-Hanuman/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are satisfied for granting bail?
Whether the delay in trial is attributable to the petitioner?
Whether co-accused have already been granted bail?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rabi Prakash Vs. State of OrisaRelied on¶19
Rabi Prakash Vs. State of Orisa (Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.4169/2023
Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Relied on¶19
Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).915 of 2023
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Raj Singh @ Raja Singh S/o Nupa Singh
State Of Rajasthan
Kuldeep Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
