Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Kiranpal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:27514) on 19 June, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:27514]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 657/2025
Kiranpal S/o Jogiram Pandit, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Rajound,
P.s. Rajound, Dist Kaithal (Hariyana (Lodged In Central Jail
Bhilwara)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : MR. Manohar Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.S. Ojha, Dy.G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
19/06/2025
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of
filing the instant bail application under Section 439 CrPC at the
instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter
are tabulated herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case 1. FIR Number 311/2023 2. Concerned Police Station Bijoliya 3. District Bhilwara 4. Offences alleged in the FIR Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act 5. Offences added, if any - 6. Date of passing of impugned 06.09.2024 order
2. The concise facts of the case as alleged in the FIR are that
On 17.10.2023, Sub-Inspector Ugaram, Station House Officer of
Police Station Bijolia, along with the patrolling team, was
conducting a blockade near Nala Ka Mataji Temple. During the
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 12:33:23 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27514] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-657/2025]
operation, a Brezza vehicle approaching from the Chittorgarh side
was observed to stop approximately 50 meters before the
checkpoint upon noticing the police presence. This behavior raised
suspicion. One passenger exited the vehicle and fled into nearby
bushes. As officers approached, the driver also attempted to flee
but was apprehended. Upon detention, he identified himself as
Kiranpal and named the absconding individual as Goldy Sardar. On
being questioned about the vehicle’s contents, Kiranpal admitted it
was carrying opium poppy powder. A search was conducted in
accordance with legal procedure, resulting in the recovery of 11
plastic sacks containing a total of 110 kilograms of opium poppy
powder. The contraband, along with the vehicle, was seized on the
spot, and Kiranpal was formally arrested. Subsequently, FIR No.
311/2023 was registered at Police Station Bijolia under Section
8/15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
(NDPS Act). Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet
was filed on 15.04.2024 before the competent court against
accused Kiranpal under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act and Section
177 of the Motor Vehicles Act; and accused Harvinder Singh under
Section 8/25 of the NDPS Act. Hence the instant bail application.
3. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no
case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his
incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the
case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-
petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures
and surmises.
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 12:33:23 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27514] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-657/2025]
4. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application
and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of
accused on bail.
5. Heard and considered the submissions made by both the
parties and have perused the material available on record.
6. Perusal of the record revealing that the petitioner has been
arrested on 17.10.2023 in connection with recovery of 110 Kg
Poppy husk. Till date out of total 16 projected witnesses,
statements of only few witnesses have been recorded in the trial.
Besides the delay in trial, the petitioner has an arguable case in
respect of non-compliance of the mandatory provisions and
floating of guidelines and NDPS rules of 2022, particularly rules 3,
5, 8, 9, and 13 cannot be overlooked. in my view, if the same
would be adjudicated in favour of the petitioner, he may get
acquittal. Of course, there is a fetter under Section 37 of the NDPS
Act regarding grant of bail to an accused having illegal possession
of commercial quantity of contraband but a fundamental right of
speedy trial to him cannot be permitted to be flouted. When there
appears conflict between the statutory provision and the
fundamental right then this Court is of the view that a protection
of fundamental right should be given preference over the statutory
bar in granting bail. If other surrounding factors align in
consonance with the statutory stipulations, the personal liberty of
an individual can not encroached upon by keeping him behind the
bars for an indefinite period of time pending trial.
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 12:33:23 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27514] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-657/2025]
8. It is well-nigh settled law that at pre-conviction stage, bail is
a rule and denial of the same should be an exception. The purpose
for keeping an accused behind the bars during trial would be to
secure his presence on the day of conviction and to ensure that he
may receive the sentence as would be awarded to him otherwise,
as stated above, it is the rule of crimnal jurisprudence that he
shall be presumed innocent until his guilt is proved. In the instant
case, now around one and half year has elapsed since the
accused was sent to jail and his rights and liberties are getting
stifled as he is being kept incarcerated without any progress in the
trial. An accused cannot be kept behind bars as an undertrial for
an indefinite period. A detailed order dated 27.08.2022 has been
passed in this regard by this Court in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous
II Bail Application No. 12906/2022 titled Suraj Vs. State of
Rajasthan wherein it has been emphasized that the right of the
accused to get a speedy trial is an inalienable fundamental right
under Article 21 of Constitution of India.
9. In Rabi Prakash Vs. State of Odisha passed in Special
leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 4169/2023, Hon’ble the Apex Court
has again passed an order dated 13th July, 2023 dealing this issue
and has held that the provisional liberty(bail) overrides the
prescribed impediment in the statute under Section 37 of the
NDPS Act as liberty directly hits one of the most precious
fundamental rights envisaged in the Constitution, that is, the right
to life and personal liberty contained in Article 21.
10. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that petitioner is behind the bars for around one and
half year thus, looking to the fact that there is high probability
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 12:33:23 AM)
[2025:RJ-JD:27514] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-657/2025]
that the trial may take long time to conclude, it is deemed suitable
to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner.
12. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439
Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as
named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he
furnishes 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 his appearance before the court concerned on all the
dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.
(FARJAND ALI),J
16-Mamta/-
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 12:33:23 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)