Allowed

Jagdish S/O Ramkalyan v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 Jan 2024CRLMB/260/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a bail application filed by an accused involved in an NDPS case. The court ruled that granting bail was appropriate considering the recovery was below commercial quantity, the trial would be lengthy, and the petitioner was long detained.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, subject to appearing in court on subsequent dates.

Jagdish S/O Ramkalyan Vs the State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:1848]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 260/2024

¶4

Jagdish S/o Ramkalyan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Mandola, Police Station Kotwali, District Baran (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail Atru, Baran)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jagdish Singh Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Imran Khan, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

¶11

Order

¶12

11/01/2024

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner in the matter arising out of F.I.R. No. 385/2023 registered at Police Station Atru, District Baran for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 8/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case, he has nothing to do with the alleged offence(s) and he is behind the bars since long time. Counsel further submits that the recovered contraband i.e. ‘ ganja ’ (1.160 kilograms) is below the commercial quantity, thus, the embargo contained under Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act would not be attracted. Counsel also submits that the other co-accused person, namely Prahlad, has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 22.12.2023. Trial of the case is likely

[2024:RJ-JP:1848]

[CRLMB-260/2024]

(2 of 2)

to take a long time to conclude. Till then his further incarceration would not serve any fruitful purpose and he is ready and willing to furnish his bail bonds. Therefore, the bail application deserves to be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶21

Taking into consideration the submissions put forth and overall facts & circumstances of the case but without commenting upon detailed merits of the case, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶22

Therefore, the bail application is allowed . Accused-petitioner namely Jagdish S/o Ramkalyan, shall be released on bail, if he is not required in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty-five Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any other court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when he is called upon to do so.

¶23

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶24

SAHIL SONI /19

Jagdish S/O Ramkalyan v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish S/O Ramkalyan v. the 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

Krishankant @ Sonu @ Ghaghara S/O Shri Dilip Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Satish Bheel S/O Bablu Babor Vs State of Rajasthan

Shiv Charan Vs State

Dr. Mohit Gupta S/O Ballu Kumar @ Balji Vs State of Rajasthan

Mangal S/O Sugan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Satish Agarwal Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.