AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sangeeta K. Vishen, J
The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail in connection with the FIR being CR
No.11215025200173 of 2020 registered with Sojitra Police Station, District Anand for the offence punishable under Sections 8(b), 8(c), 20(a) and
20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Heard Mr.Maulin G. Pandya, learned advocate for the applicant and Ms. Nisha Thakor, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent
State, through video conference.
Mr.Pandya, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by
imposing suitable conditions. It is submitted that the contraband article, i.e. cannabis was 9 kgs., i.e. less than commercial quantity. Reliance has been
placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Ram vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (1) SCR 394. It is submitted that the Apex
Court has categorically observed that 'there must be supporting evidence to prove that the accused cultivated the plant and it is not enough that few
plants were found in the property of the accused. It is quite reasonable to assume that sometimes the plants may sprout up, if seeds happened to be
embedded in earth due to natural process. If plants are sprouted by natural growth, it cannot be said that it amounts to cultivation'. It is submitted that
9 kgs. and 179 gms. of cannabis were found from the agricultural land along with other plants and thus, it cannot be said that the applicant has
cultivated those plants inasmuch as, sometimes plants may grow on its own, if the seeds are embedded in earth due to natural process. It is submitted
that the applicant is aged 68 years and is in jail since 8.6.2020. That investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. Under the circumstances, it is
prayed that considering the nature of offence, the applicant be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State has opposed this application looking to the nature
and gravity of the offence.
Learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material available on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case,
nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court is of the opinion that this is
a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
This Court has considered the aspect that the applicant is aged 68 years and is in jail since 8.6.2020. The quantity involved is 9 kgs., i.e. less than
the commercial quantity. The investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. This Court has also taken into consideration the law enunciated by the
Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.
Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being CR
No.11215025200173 of 2020 registered with Sojitra Police Station, District Anand , on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that the applicant shall â€
(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week;
(d) mark presence before the concerned police station between 1st to 10th day of every English calendar month between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(e) not leave India without the permission of the Court and if having passport, deposit the same before the trial Court within a week; and
(f) furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change
the residence without prior permission of the concerned trial Court;
The authorities shall adhere to its own circular regarding COVID- 19 and thereafter release the applicant only if he is not required in connection
with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the learned Sessions Judge concerned will be free to
issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be
open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
Needless to say, at the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Registry to communicate this order to the concerned court/authority through fax or e-mail, forthwith.