Bade Guru v. The State of Madhya Pradesh in Special Leave to Appeal

: Ms. Anushree Sharma Mr. Aditya Sayed Mr. Chain Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN 24/07/2025 Order

1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.284/2023 registered at Police Station Bhinay, District Kekri (Rajasthan) for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. [2025:RJ-JP:27671] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-8478/2025]

2. The first bail applications preferred on behalf of the petitioners were dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 17.01.2025. Thereafter, interim bail was preferred on behalf of petitioner- Gurpreet Singh on account of his daughter’s marriage and same was allowed vide order dated 10.02.2025 wherein he surrendered on 24.02.2025. Now, Seizure Officer of this case has been examined during the course of trial thus, these bail applications have been preferred on behalf of the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submit that according to the prosecution case, petitioners were carrying contraband poppy husk weighing 110 kg. Counsel submit that admittedly, in this case petitioners were arrested on 19.10.2023 and on 04.11.2023 in presence of jurisdictional Magistrate, inventory was prepared and samples were drawn. Counsel submit that samples drawn by the Magistrate were deposited in the FSL on 23.01.2024 i.e., after a delay of more than 2.5 months. Counsel submit that there is no plausible reason available on record with regard to the delay in depositing the samples in the FSL. Counsel submit that petitioners have already suffered incarceration of about 21 months. It is submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken the view in the matter of Devendra Kumar Mishra @ Bade Guru vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.14639/2023 that on the ground of period of incarceration suffered by accused, bail application under the NDPS Act can be considered for grant. Further reliance has been placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble [2025:RJ-JP:27671] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-8478/2025] Supreme Court in the case of Shambhulal Gurjar @ Rohit vs. State of Rajasthan in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.16671/2024 wherein after taking note of the fact that three other cases under the NDPS Act have been registered against the petitioner, facility of bail was granted to the accused considering the period of incarceration.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner- Gurpreet Singh submits that except one case under the provision of NDPS Act wherein less than commercial quantity has been recovered, no other case has been registered against the petitioner. Counsel further submits that in the said case, no recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner and he has only been implicated under Section 8/29 of NDPS Act and benefit of anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner- Shaktiman submits that petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. It is submitted that there is bleak chance of culmination of trial in near future as till date, only 9 witnesses have been examined out of 28 cited prosecution witnesses. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer of bail made by learned counsel for the petitioners. He submits that petitioners have been found in possession of commercial quantity of contraband therefore, considering the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, benefit of bail should not be granted to the petitioners.

6. I have considered the contentions. [2025:RJ-JP:27671] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-8478/2025]

7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the observations made by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Devendra Kumar Mishra @ Bade Guru (supra) and Shambhulal Gurjar @ Rohit (supra) as also considering the fact that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as till date, only 9 witnesses have been examined out of 28 cited prosecution witnesses, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.

8. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Gurpreet Singh S/o Mithu Singh and (2) Shaktiman S/o Chotu Ram, shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

9. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.

10. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the [2025:RJ-JP:27671] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-8478/2025] petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

11. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to them by this Court.

12. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. LALIT MOHAN /32-33 (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J