Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Shyam Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:3720) on 21 January, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:3720]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 12520/2024
Shyam Lal S/o Shri Chetan Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Birani, Police Station Bhopalgarh, At Present Mahlana, Dhani,
Police Station Kherapa, District Jodhpur, Raj. (At Present Lodged
In Sub-Jail Suratgarh.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.R. Godara
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
21/01/2025
This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
(483 BNSS) has been filed by the petitioner who has been
arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.457/2023 registered at Police
Station Suratgarh, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, for the offences under
Sections 8/15, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public
Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the
prosecution, a significant quantity of psychotropic substance
(Tramadol Hydrochloride tablets/ Alphrazolam) and contraband
(poppy husk/straw) were recovered from the conscious possession
of the co-accused Naveen Kumar. Co-accused Naveen Kumar, in
the information provided by him under Section 27 of the Indian
Evidence Act as well as in his disclosure statements recorded
(Downloaded on 21/01/2025 at 09:53:28 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:3720] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12520/2024]
under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, has revealed that he had
procured the recovered contraband from another co-accused
Noratan Ram.
Learned counsel submitted that when the co-accused
Noratan Ram was apprehended by the Investigating Agency, he in
his disclosure statements had stated that he was supplied the
recovered contraband by the present petitioner and one Mahadev.
It was submitted that apart from the disclosure statements of co-
accused Noratan Ram, there is no significant evidence available on
record indicating involvement of the present petitioner in
commission of the alleged crime. It was further submitted that the
Noratan Ram on the basis of whose disclosure statements, the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, has
already been enlarged on bail (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail
Application No.14968/2024) by this Court vide order dated
18.12.2024.
Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in
judicial custody since 20.12.2023; no case of similar nature is
pending against the present petitioner and the trial of the case will
take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be
granted to the accused-petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the bail application. However, he was not in a position to
refute the fact that the psychotropic substance and the
contraband were not recovered from the conscious possession of
the present petitioner. He was also not in a position to refute the
fact that the co-accused Noratan Ram, on the basis of whose
(Downloaded on 21/01/2025 at 09:53:28 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:3720] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12520/2024]
disclosure statements, the petitioner was implicated in the present
case, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order
dated 18.12.2024.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on
merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail.
Consequently, the second bail application under Section 439
Cr.P.C. (483 BNSS) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-
petitioner Shyam Lal S/o Shri Chetan Ram arrested in
connection with F.I.R. No.457/2023 registered at Police Station
Suratgarh, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, 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.
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
181-divya/-
(Downloaded on 21/01/2025 at 09:53:28 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_1]
Source link