Allowed

Lokesh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Feb 2024CRLMB/9283/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Justice Praveer Bhatnagar allowed bail applications for two accused persons charged under the NDPS Act, taking note that contraband was recovered from an accompanying vehicle of co-accused but nothing from their car, deeming it just to enlarge them on bail with bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners Gopal and Lokesh shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.

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

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:8366]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8763/2023

¶4

Gopal S/o Rodilal, Aged About 35 Years, Umarda, P.s. Dhamodar, Dist. Pratapgarh. (At Present Lodged In Jail Dist. Sirohi).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9283/2023 Lokesh S/o Shri Daya Lal, Aged About 36 Years, B/c Brahman, R/o Dev Colony, Pratapgarh. (Presently Lodged In Sub Jail, Pindwara, District Sirohi)

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Gajendra Panwar
	Mr. Rakesh Arora
	Mr. Naresh Singh
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. M. S. Bhati-PP

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶17

Order

¶18

16/02/2024

¶19

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioners. The accused-petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.132/2023 registered at Police Station Pindwara, District Sirohi for the offence(s) under Sections 8/15, 18 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accusedpetitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that accused-petitioners have been implicated solely on

[2024:RJ-JD:8366]

[CRLMB-8763/2023]

(2 of 3)

the ground that their vehicle was apprehended along with vehicle No.GJ01RJ9154 in which contraband articles were recovered from the possession of the co-accused Hira Lal and Jagdish. He further submits that there is no substantive evidence showing the connivance of the present accused-petitioners in carrying the contraband articles in Car bearing No.GJ01RJ9154. The accusedpetitioners are in custody since arrest. The charge-sheet has already been produced. The trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioners.

¶25

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. He submits that accused’s vehicle bearing No.RJ02CA7764 was escorting the Swift Dezire car bearing No.GJ01RJ9154 in which contraband article containing commercial quantity of 68 kg of poppy straw and 1.2 kg of opium was being carried. He further submits that in the Swift Dzire car from possession of the co-accused Hira Lal and Jagdish, commercial quantity of contraband articles recovered. Therefore, considering the fact that accused-petitioners were accompanying and escorting the said vehicle from which contraband article was recovered, the bail application of the accused-petitioners may be dismissed.

¶26

Without commenting anything on the merits and taking into note that commercial quantity of poppy straw and opium was recovered from the car of the co-accused Hira Lal and Jagdish and no recovery of contraband article was effected from the accusedpetitioners’ car bearing No.RJ02CA7764, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

[2024:RJ-JD:8366]

[CRLMB-8763/2023]

(3 of 3)

Accordingly, this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners Gopal S/o Rodilal & Lokesh S/o Shri Daya Lal in connection with FIR No.132/2023 registered at Police Station Pindwara, District Sirohi shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnish 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 their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶31

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶32

29–30-Rahul Joshi/-

Lokesh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lokesh 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

Shankar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Badrilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sugan Prajapat Vs Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Heamant Upadhay Vs State of Rajasthan

Gopal Vs State of Rajasthan

House of Royals Hospitality LLP Vs State of Rajasthan