High CourtsSingle Bench

Mohit Nagpal vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 5 April 2024 · Citation: (2024) 04 RAJ CK 0031

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kuldeep Mathur, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 8, 22, 29
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 2138 Of 2024
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

11 paragraphs · 549 words

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.95/2022 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, for the offences under Sections 8/22 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, on 26.02.2022, a delivery boy approached the police party to state that on 24.02.2022, a parcel has been received by him by post however, no one has claimed it. Upon conducting investigation of the whereabouts of the said parcel, it was surfaced that the said parcel was booked by the present petitioner and the co-accused under false identities and it contained illegal psychotropic substance (2,304 capsules SPAS TRANCAN PLUS). In pursuance of the same, the present FIR No. 95/2022 was lodged on 26.02.2022.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the Court towards the statements of the Investigating Officer- Kashyap Singh recorded before the competent criminal court on 05.04.2024 as PW-4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Investigating Officer during his courts statements has failed to establish any link of the petitioner with the alleged commission of crime.

Learned counsel submitted that the contraband was not recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner and that there is nothing on record to indicate that the present petitioner has played any active role in commission of alleged crime.

It was further contended that, as a matter of fact, that the petitioner has been falsely implicated solely for the reason that the co-accused person namely Gulshan Nagpal on 23.03.2022 had sent a bilty and a photocopy of the parcel allegedly containing psychotropic substance on the mobile phone of the present petitioner. Though no mobile phone bearing SIM No. 9673104315 as mentioned to belong to the receiver of the parcel has been recovered by the Investigating Agency.

Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 06.06.2022. This Court also prima facie finds that the psychotropic substance was not recovered from the conscious possession of the present petitioner. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Consequently, the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Mohit Nagpal S/o Shri Chiman Lal Arora arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.95/2022 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Dist. Sri Ganganagar, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.