Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Kamlesh Patidar vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:18942) on 17 April, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:18942]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 12532/2023
Kamlesh Patidar S/o Shri Hari Ram Patidar, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Malkhera Ps Nimach City Tehsil And Dist. Nimach At Present
Lodged In Dist. Jail Nimach
----Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India, Through CBN
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Chandra Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.S. Nahar, Spl. PP CBN
Mr. Gopal Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
17/04/2025
1. This second application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has
been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection
with F.I.R. No.03/2023 registered at Police Station CBN, Dist.
Kota, for the offences under Sections 8/18 and 8/15 of NDPS Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the
basis of specific secret information received by CBN Kota, District
Chittorgarh on 15.03.2023, the officials of CBN Kota intercepted a
bus bearing registration No.UP-75-8E-8103. After following the
due procedure provided under the NDPS Act, when a thorough
search of the bus was made, the officials of CBN recovered
contraband (opium) weighing 59.206 kgs. and contraband (poppy
husk/straw) weighting 34.550 kgs. from the bus. The co-accused
Ramniwas and Deepak Yadav were arrested on the spot.
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:30:05 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:18942] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-12532/2023]
3. Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecution, the
petitioner- Kamlesh Patidar loaded the seized opium and poppy
husk/straw in the offending vehicle. The contraband was meant to
be delivered to one Ashok S/o Javtaram, R/o village Fitkasani,
District Jodhpur.
4. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has been
falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the
Court towards the statements of the Anuj Sharma (PW.1), learned
counsel submitted that the statement of the Seizure Officer clearly
indicates that apart from the disclosure statements of the co-
accused persons, there is no direct/corroboratory evidence
available on record indicating the involvement of the petitioner in
commission of the alleged crime. The mobile phones/sim cards
allegedly used by the petitioner to make conversations with the
co-accused persons do not belong to him. No mobile call was ever
made by the petitioner to the co-accused Ramniwas and Deepak
Yadav. Only two mobile calls were made by the petitioner to co-
accused Ashok Bishnoi on 26.02.2023 about 20 days prior to the
date of recovery. The mobile call between two known person is not
unusual and that is not sufficient to establish connection of the
petitioner with the alleged recovery of the contraband.
5. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in
judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long
time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-
petitioner.
6. Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the bail application and submitted that sufficient
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:30:05 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:18942] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-12532/2023]
corroboratory evidence in the form of mobile call linkage between
the accused petitioner as well as co-accused persons has been
gathered during investigation and therefore, looking to the
seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present
petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail by this
Court.
7. The relevant portion of the statements of Seizure Officer-
Anuj Sharma (PW.1) is reproduced below for ready reference:-
“;g dguk lgh gS fd i=koyh ij vfHk;qDr o lg vfHk;qDr dh okV~lvi dkWy fMVsy ugh
gSA ;g lgh gS fd fle uEcj 7024672205 o fle uEcj 6264481029 ds dEiuh }kjk fn;s
x;s dSQ vfHk;qDr deys”k ds uke ls ugh gSA ;g lgh gS fd cjkenxh fnukad 15-03-2023 dks
vfHk;qDr deys”k dh lg&vfHk;qDrx.k ls lknk dkWy dh fMVsy ugh gSA ;g lgh gS fd
vfHk;qDr deys”k dh lg&vfHk;qDrx.k ls okVlvi dkWy dh fMVsy dh dksbZ QnZ i=koyh ij
miyC/k ugh gSA ;g lgh gS fd vfHk;qDr deys”k ikVhnkj ds fo:) iwoZ esa
dksbZ ,uMhih,l ,DV dk izdj.k ntZ gksuk esjs vuqlU/kku esa ugh vk;kA ;g lgh gS fd
i=koyh esa dksbZ ,slk lk{; ugha feyk] ftlls deys”k }kjk VSDlh esa yksM djus dk fdjk;k
izkfIr ckcr dksbZ jlhn izkIr ugh gqbZA ;g lgh gS fd eSus vuqlaU/kku ds nkSjku deys”k
ds }kjk eky izkIr djus ds LFkku vkSj okgu esa fMyhojh nsus ds LFkku dk uD”kk ekSdk ugh
cuk;kA”
8. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public
Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
9. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the
petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents; the contraband
was not recovered from the conscious possession of the present
petitioner; the sim card/mobile number allegedly used by the
petitioner to contact the co-accused persons does not belong to
him; no call linkage/connection between the petitioner and the co-
accused Ramniwas and Deepak Yadav from whose conscious
possession the contraband was recovered is available on record;
the last call allegedly made by the petitioner to suspect Ashok
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:30:05 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:18942] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-12532/2023]
Bishnoi is of 26.02.2023 i.e. about 20 days prior to the date of
recovery, which in the opinion of this Court at this stage is not
sufficient to infer that the recovered contraband was loaded by the
petitioner in the offending vehicle at the instance of Ashok
Bishnoi.
10. In the opinion of this Court, the twin conditions enumerated
under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are duly satisfied in the present
case. Thus, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
11. Consequently, the second bail application under Section 483
BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner
Kamlesh Patidar S/o Shri Hari Ram Patidar arrested in
connection with F.I.R. No.03/2023 registered at Police Station
CBN, Dist. Kota, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any
other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of
Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to the
satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that
court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon
to do so till completion of the trial.
11. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations
made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail
application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
266-divya/-
(Downloaded on 21/04/2025 at 09:30:05 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_1]
Source link