DISTT. MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH) v. (BY SHRI AJAY RAJ GUPTA - PANEL LAWYER.)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 437(3), 439
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ss. 8, 18, 29, 37
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. As per the prosecution story, on 01.06.2023, police received a discrete Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 20-06-2023 10:48:12 2 information from informant regarding illegal transportation of contraband. Acting upon said information, police party reached on the spot and intercepted the…
- Para 77. Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicants be released on bail upon their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Fifty Thousand only) each with…
Judgment
(BY SHRI ABHISHEK RATHORE - ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION Y.D. NAGAR, DISTT. MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH) .....APPLICANT (BY SHRI AJAY RAJ GUPTA - PANEL LAWYER.) .....RESPONDENT This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following: ORDER Applicants have filed this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicant for grant of regular bail relating to Crime No.242/2023 registered at P.S. Y.D. Nagar, District Mandsaur (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 8/18 and 29 of NDPS Act. They are in jail since 01.06.2023.
As per the prosecution story, on 01.06.2023, police received a discrete Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 20-06-2023 10:48:12 2 information from informant regarding illegal transportation of contraband. Acting upon said information, police party reached on the spot and intercepted the Bike bearing registration No.MP-44-B-8191 and recovered 01 Kg opium from the possession of applicant No.1 Tejpal Singh. Only on the basis of memorandum under Section given 27 of Evidence Act by applicant No.1 Tejpal, applicant No.2 Rohit has been implicated in this offence. Accordingly, case has been registered.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicants are innocents and they have been falsely implicated in this matter. Applicants are in jail since
01.06.2023. The seized quantity of contraband is below than the commercial quantity. Investigation is almost over. No criminal antecedents have been found against the present applicants. They are the permanent resident of district Neemuch. Final conclusion of trial will take considerable long time. Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.
Per-contra, learned counsel for respondent/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that investigation is still going on.
Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order of the court below.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation as also taking note of the fact that applicant is in custody since 01.06.2023; seized quantity of contraband is below than the commercial quantity, therefore, there is no bar under Section 37 of NDPS Act is attracted in the present case; investigation is almost over; applicants are not having any criminal past and final conclusion of trial will take considerable long time, I Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 20-06-2023 10:48:12 deem it proper to release the applicant on bail. 3
Operative part
Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicants be released on bail upon their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Fifty Thousand only) each with separate solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. They shall abide by the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C. Certified copy as per rules. Anushree (ANIL VERMA) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANUSHREE PANDEY Signing time: 20-06-2023 10:48:12
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 437(3), 439; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — ss. 8, 18, 29, 37; Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.