Allowed

Bhupindar Singh S/O Sravan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC14 May 2024CRLMB/2969/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

single judge allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a narcotics case where contraband was recovered from a vehicle owned by him but allegedly driven by his son. Court ordered personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each in Police Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Bhupindar Singh S/O Sravan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:22733]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2969/2024

¶4

Bhupindar Singh S/o Sravan Singh, R/o Haripur Khalsa, P.S. Fillour District Jalandhar Panjab.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Rahim Khan, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

14/05/2024

¶13

Apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.91/2023, registered at Police Station Mandana, District Kota (Rural) for the offence(s) under Sections 8/15 and 8/18 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the petitioner has preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The recovery of contraband article from the vehicle was effected from the other co-accused Jaswant Singh and Lakhvir Singh. Co-accused Jaswant Singh is son of the petitioner. The petitioner was not having any knowledge that the other co-accused were carrying prohibited contraband article in the petitioner's vehicle. The petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation, there is no criminal antecedents against the petitioner, therefore, the

[2024:RJ-JP:22733]

[CRLMB-2969/2024]

(2 of 3)

anticipatory bail application of the present petitioner may be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that the other co-accused Jaswant Singh and Lakhvir Singh were carrying 2 Kg and 20 gram of poppy straw in a Dzire Car belonging to the present petitioner, therefore, the anticipatory bail application of the present petitioner may be dismissed.

¶20

Heard and perused the impugned order dated 29.02.2024. 5. Admittedly, the recovery of contraband article containing 2 Kg and 20 gram of poppy straw and 735 gram of opium was effected from the other co-accused Jaswant Singh and Lakhvir Singh from the Dzire Car bearing No. PB-37-K-1468. The said vehicle belongs to the petitioner, the other co-accused Jaswant Singh who is son of the petitioner and co-accused Lakhvir Singh have already been arrested. The petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case, therefore, considering the above facts, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner.

¶21

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner- Bhupindar Singh S/o Sravan Singh, in connection with FIR No.91/2023, registered at Police Station Mandana, District Kota (Rural), he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:22733]

[CRLMB-2969/2024]

satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned

¶26

Police Station on the following conditions:-

¶27

(i) that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶28

(ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and

¶29

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶30

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶31

Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-27

Bhupindar Singh S/O Sravan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupindar Singh S/O Sravan Singh 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

Rahul Dhanka S/O Shri Kishan Lal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Bharat Singh S/O Shri Bagsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Sant Ram Niranjan S/O Late Shri Raghuvanshi Lal Niranjan Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil S/O Late Sh. Laxminarayan Mali Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ajay Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Harinarayan Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Pappu Singh S/O Shri Mohan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan