Allowed

Vikram Singh S/O Balu Singh Rawat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Apr 2024CRLMB/3928/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an NDPS case where recovery was made from a co-accused's field and the petitioner showed no contact with the alleged supplier, the High Court of Rajasthan allowed bail for the accused despite potential procedural lapses, emphasizing the dissimilarity of his connection to the contraband.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge.

Vikram Singh S/O Balu Singh Rawat Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:18131]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3928/2024

¶4

Vikram Singh S/o Balu Singh Rawat, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Govliya, Ps-Bhinay, Dist-Kekri, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Tanmay Dhand with
	Mr. Karan Palawat
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

18/04/2024

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.257/2023 registered at Police Station Bhinay, District Kekri for the offence(s) under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the recovery was effected from the agriculture field of the other co-accused Deepak Singh and as the accusedpetitioner was present at the instance, he has been involved in the alleged crime. The investigation also reveals that co-accused received the contraband articles from other co-accused Sher Singh and the call analysis also shows that accused-petitioner was not in contact with the other co-accused Sher Singh against whom

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:18131]

[CRLMB-3928/2024]

investigation is still pending. He further submits that the recovery was effected from the open place and the agriculture field belongs to the other co-accused Deepak Singh and presence of Deepak Singh was also found at the place of incident . He further submits that the compliances under Sections 41, 50 & 52-A of NDPS Act was also not made. The accused-petitioner is in custody since long and charge-sheet has already been produced and the trial/investigation of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application may be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that from the possession of the accusedpetitioner and other co-accused Deepak Singh, huge quantity of contraband article containing 348.300 Kg of poppy straw was recovered. Therefore, considering the bar imposed under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed.

¶20

Heard and perused the charge-sheet.

¶21

Admittedly, the recovery of poppy straw was effected from the agriculture field belonging to the other co-accused Deepak Singh. The investigation also demonstrates that co-accused Deepak Singh received the contraband articles from the other coaccused Sher Singh, against whom the investigation is still pending. The call details analysis of Deepak Singh and present accused-petitioner along with the co-accused Sher Singh also shows that present petitioner has no connectivity with the other co-accused Sher Singh. The CDR analysis report shows that the accused-petitioner was not in contact with the co-accused Sher

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:18131]

[CRLMB-3928/2024]

Singh. At this juncture, it is not desirable to express about the compliances made under Sections 41, 50 & 52-A of NDPS Act.

¶26

Considering the fact that the agriculture field belongs to the other co-accused Deepak Singh and connectivity of Deepak Singh with the other co-accused Sher Singh in receiving the poppy straw was found through mobile calls and no connectivity of present accused-petitioner was found with the other co-accused Sher Singh and also taking into note that accused-petitioner is in custody since long, thus, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶27

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Vikram Singh S/o Balu Singh Rawat in connection with FIR No.257/2023 registered at Police Station Bhinay, District Kekri shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶28

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶29

Keshav/123

Vikram Singh S/O Balu Singh Rawat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Singh S/O Balu Singh Rawat 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

Rohit Kumar S/O Manoj Sindhi Vs State of Rajasthan

Abhishek Kumar S/O Shri Rajesh Roshan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ram Kishore Khoja @ Kishore @ Kalu S/O Bhiyan Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Dimple @ Ghanshyam @ Sonu S/O Rambabu Vs State of Rajasthan

Piyush Bharat Saini S/O Ramesh Chand Suman Vs the State of Rajasthan

Babulal S/O Panchuram Vs the State of Rajasthan