Allowed

Sonu v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Aug 2024CRLMB/7618/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The Court granted bail to the petitioner charged with NDPS offences, noting the contraband recovered was below commercial quantity, trial is lengthy, and no useful purpose is served by continued detention.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail providing a personal bond and two surety bonds of sufficient amount with submission of bank details and Aadhar cards as per the order conditions.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:32930]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7618/2024

¶4

Sonu S/o Sukhdev Singh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Nava, P.S. Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanaumangarh (At Present Lodged In District Jail, Hanumangarh)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. M.S. Soni
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Arun Kumar, PP with
	Mr. C.P. Marwan

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI Order

¶11

07/08/2024

¶12

Arrested in furtherance of FIR No.457/2024, registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh, petitioner has filed this application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing him on bail. The petitioner is charged for offences punishable under Section 8/21 of the NDPS Act.

¶13

I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned public prosecutor and perused the record.

¶14

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has strongly objected the different submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that 7.50 Gms. of contraband heroin has been recovered in this matter. Therefore, petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail.

[2024:RJ-JD:32930]

[CRLMB-7618/2024]

(2 of 3)

I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions with reference to material placed before me.

¶19

On perusal of the record and upon consideration of the submissions, it would be clear that according to the case spelled out in the FIR, the petitioner was apprehended while having in possession abovementioned contraband. The challan has already been filed. The recovered contraband weighs below the commercial quantity therefore, recording of finding envisaged under Section 37 of the Act is not a sine qua non for granting bail. Trial of the case will take sufficient time to conclude.

¶20

Having considered the material available on record; the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioner particularly the facts narrated above and the fact that trial is likely to take its own considerable time and taking note of all these aspects I do not intend to go into the merits of the matter but of the considered view that the rigor of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. act is duly satisfied, forasmuch this Court feels that the petitioner has available to him substantial grounds so as to question the prosecution case and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in detention for an indefinite period therefore, I am inclined to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioner at this stage.

¶21

Consequently, the present bail application is allowed and it is directed that the accused-petitioner Sonu S/o Sukhdev Singh , arrested in connection with the F.I.R. No.457/2024, registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond and two surety bonds of sufficient amount to the satisfaction of the learned

[2024:RJ-JD:32930]

[CRLMB-7618/2024]

(3 of 3)

trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. This order is subject to the condition that accused, within 7 days of his release, and sureties on the day of furnishing bail, will also furnish details of their all bank accounts, with bank and branch name, in shape of an affidavit, and submit legible copy of their Aadhar cards as well as copy of front page of Bank pass book, for smooth recovery of penalty amount, if there arise a need for recovery of penalty under Section 446 Cr.P.C in future.

¶26

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J

¶27

167-suraj/-

Sonu v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu 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

Mohani Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhawani Giri Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sushmita Shobhawat Vs Vinay Prakash

Dhyan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jawed @ Akib Vs State of Rajasthan