Sarangpur Police Station Mandi Aadampur District Hisar v. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor

: Ms. Namrata Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN 19/05/2025 Order

1. Instant SOS application is preferred by appellant accused Surendra in pending appeal filed aggrieved from judgment of conviction and sentence dated 11.03.2025 in sessions case no. 22/2020 passed by learned Special Judge (NDPS Act cases), Bhawani Mandi, District Jhalawar.

2. Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated by police. She submitted that at the time of interception by police, the car was driven by Vishnu Kumar and Rohtash was sitting with Vishnu Kumar and present appellant was sitting on rear seat. She also submitted that police without ensuring compliance of mandatory [2025:RJ-JP:21556] (2 of 5) [SOSA-770/2025] provisions under the NDPS Act has searched the car and allegedly recovered 66 kg of poppy straw (crushed capsule of poppy). She further referred the process of sampling and submitted that the police has mixed the entire contraband found in 3 gunny bags and after mixing them has drawn samples which is contrary to established norms. She further submitted that this appellant is neither the owner of car nor transporting contraband poppy straw. She also submitted that this appellant accused was not found in exclusive possession of contraband, and he is in custody for last more than 5 years and 5 months which is more than 50% of the sentence, so he is entitled to be released on bail. She also submitted that before search and seizure the independent witnesses were not procurred by police. Learned counsel has referred order dated 02.08.2023 in criminal appeal no. 310/2022 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench at Jodhpur and submitted that in similar circumstances, a Co-ordinate Bench has allowed SOS application.

3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he submitted custody certificate of appellant accused and same is taken on record.

4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

5. On the basis of interception on 29.11.2019 by police, 66 kgs of poppy husk (crushed capsule of poppy) recovered from three gunny bags in car no. HR26 CY 9375. The driver of the car was Vishnu Kumar whereas two other persons Rohtash and Surendra accompanied in the car. After proceedings, FIR no. 488/2019 was [2025:RJ-JP:21556] (3 of 5) [SOSA-770/2025] registered at P.S. Bhawani Mandi, District Jhalawar. After investigation police has filed charge-sheet against Vishnu, Rohtash and Surendra under Section 8/15 and 8/19 of NDPS Act and against Hawa Singh under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act but kept pending against Amandeep and Risal Singh. Later, a supplementary charge-sheet is filed against Risal Singh. After framing the charge the prosecution has examined 13 witnesses and exhibited 54 documents. The accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and in defence DW-1 Risal Singh was examined. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhawani Mandi has convicted Vishnu, Rohtash and Surendra under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act but acquitted Hawa Singh and Risal Singh. After conviction the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years with fine of ₹1,00,000/-.

6. Till date this appellant has served more than five years and five months. The appellant is in custody since his arrest. The recovered quantity is commercial quantity.

7. The case of Dadu @ Tulsidas vs State of Maharashtra : (2000) 8 SCC 437 followed till date including case of Union of India Vs. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Pappu : 2023 SCC OnLine SC 346 that without compliance of condition under Section 37 of NDPS Act, a bail/suspension of sentence cannot be granted to anyone in matter of recovery of commercial quantity.

8. In case of the State of Meghalaya Vs. Lalrintluanga Sailo & Anr.: 2024 INSC 537, after considering a 3 Judge Bench judgment in case of Collector of Customs, New Delhi Vs. Ahmadalieva Nodira :(2004) 3 SCC 549 and State of Karela [2025:RJ-JP:21556] (4 of 5) [SOSA-770/2025] and Ors. Vs. Rajesh and Ors. : (2020) 12 SCC 122, Hon’ble Supreme Court has allowed appeal of State and cancelled bail granted to accused in wake of restrictions under Section 37 of NDPS Act.

9. From aforesaid judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court it is established that before considering any bail/SOS in relation to charge of commercial quantity, it is necessary to comply the provision of Section 37 of NDPS Act.

10. Herein this case, the custody certificate indicate that this appellant accused was also involved in another NDPS Act matter having case No. 255/2012 dated 19.12.2012 under Section 55/27- A, 85 of NDPS Act P.S. City Tohana (Fatehabad-Haryana). Learned Public Prosecutor is not aware about the pendency of other case but the record submitted by jail indicate that one case was registered against accused and same relates to NDPS Act. Learned counsel is also not aware about the case relating to NDPS Act at P.S. City Tohana, Disrict Fatehbad (Haryana).

11. The grounds raised by learned counsel can be considered at the time of final adjudication, though, the appellant has completed 50% of the sentence awarded to him but this matter pertains to commercial quantity and one more case under the NDPS Act is found against him and the appellant has not revealed the detail of case registered against him. Thus, the appellant accused is not entitled to get benefit of the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench as referred by him. [2025:RJ-JP:21556] (5 of 5) [SOSA-770/2025]

12. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the sos application preferred by appellant accused-Surendra son of Shamser Singh, is hereby dismissed.

13. List for hearing in the month of November, 2025. CHETNA BEHRANI /37 (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J