High CourtsSingle Bench

Kishore vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 20 January 2020 · Citation: (2020) 01 MP CK 0074

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Awasthi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 8, 15 · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 161, 437(3)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 54742 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

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 · 438 words

This application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant-Kishore who is implicated in connection with Crime No.184/2019, registered at Police Station-Piplyamandi, District-Mandsaur, concerning offence under Sections 8/15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and Section 382 of IPC, 1860.

As per prosecution story, on 29/04/2019 complainant lodged a report that on 29/04/2019 he was sleeping in the bada and at about 01.30 am he heard some noise and he saw some unknown persons were taking away 4 sacks, 60 kgs of poppy husk from his house. On the basis of which FIR was registered against the accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. This is the first case registered against the applicant under the NDPS Act. According to the prosecution story, on 09/05/2019 at about 18.40 hours 60 kgs of poppy straw alleged to have been recovered from the house of co-accused Jhalam situated at village Pamarkheda. Though the joint seizure memo has been made by the Police, however, the aforesaid recovery has been made on the basis of memorandum of co-accused Jhalam recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act, therefore, it cannot be said that this recovery has been made in the instance of the present applicant. The applicant is not named in the FIR nor in the statement of complainant recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is custody since 09/05/2019. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time. There is no possibility of absconsion or tampering with the evidence if the applicant is released on bail. Under these circumstances, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail, hence the application filed by the applicant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees two lakhs only), with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, with a condition that he/she shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.