Allowed

Arvind v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 Jul 2024CRLMB/8998/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under CrPC Section 439 for NDPS charges, the High Court allowed bail. The court held that since the recovered poppy husk was below commercial quantity, recording findings under NDPS Section 37 was not mandatory, and substantial grounds to question prosecution case existed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner arrested in FIR no.118/2024 released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two surety bonds of sufficient amount to court satisfaction.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:30283]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8998/2024

¶4

Arvind S/o Punma Ram, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vishnoiyo Ka Goliya, Village Panchayat Basra Dhanji, Ps Ramsin, Dist. Jalore. (Lodged In Central Jail Udaipur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Ranawat
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP assisted by
	Mr. Ravindra Khichi,AGA

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI Order

¶11

24/07/2024

¶12

Petitioner is lugged and locked in F.I.R No.118/2024 of Police Station Bhinder, District Udaipur, for the offence under Section(s) 8/15 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. He has filed this application for restoration of liberty under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶13

I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant and submitted that 42.500 Kgs. of contraband poppy husk has been recovered from the applicant. He thus, prayed that in the facts of the present case, it is expedient that accused be kept in the custody.

[CRLMB-8998/2024]

[2024:RJ-JD:30283]

(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 of abovementioned contraband. 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 and 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 applicant particularly the facts narrated above and the fact that applicant is in custody since 17.06.2024; 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 applicant has available to him substantial grounds so as to question the prosecution case and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant 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 Arvind S/o Punma Ram , arrested in connection with the F.I.R. No.118/2024 of Police Station Bhinder, District Udaipur shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond and two surety bonds of sufficient

¶22

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-8998/2024]

¶23

[2024:RJ-JD:30283]

¶24

amount to the satisfaction of the learned 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.

¶25

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J

¶26

163-Payal/-

Arvind v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind 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

Om Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Jagdish Vs State of Rajasthan

Prabhu Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rekha Vs State of Rajasthan

Brijesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kalu Ram Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan