AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 245 wordsYogendra Kumar Purohit, J
The instant bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The applicant has been arrested in connection with FIR No.57/2024 registered at Police Station Kotada, District Udaipur for the offence(s) under Section 8/20, of the NDPS Act.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. The recovered contraband is below commercial quantity. There is no other case registered against the applicant under the NDPS Act. The applicant is behind the bars. The trial may take long time to conclude. Thus, learned counsel submitted that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application.
Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits and demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-applicant Balram @ Balaram S/o Sh Hamira arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/-each to the satisfaction of the learned lower court for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.