Parvatsingh vs State Of Rajasthan

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.208/2010 of Police Station Shambhupra, District Chittorgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 8/18, 8/25 and 29 NDPS Act. He has preferred this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per the prosecution story, the police arrested two accused persons viz. Pratap Singh and Pintu @ Gajendra while they were transporting 30.500 kgs. of illegal opium in WagaonR car on 15.11.2010. It is submitted that during the course of interrogation, the above named two co-accused persons, while in police custody, informed that they were supposed to supply the said narcotic contraband to the petitioner. It is submitted that on the basis of the information given by the above named two co-accused persons, the petitioner was named as accused in this case and the police have concluded that they have collected the mobile call details of the petitioner and other co-accused persons to establish the link of the petitioner with the other co-accused. It is submitted that now the statements of Investigating Officer Boraj Singh have been recorded as PW-15, in which during his cross-examination he has specifically stated that he has not collected any independent witnesses or any direct or any indirect evidence to connect the link between the petitioner and the two co-accused persons, from whom the narcotic contraband was recovered. It is submitted that the Investigating Officer has also specifically stated that he has not verified from any service provider that the call details i.e. Exhibit-37 belongs to the petitioner's phone. It is submitted that the Investigating Officer has further stated that during the course of investigation, no such evidence has been collected by him to suggest that the mobile phone said to have been used by the petitioner is belongs to the petitioner only. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in so many words the Investigating Officer has admitted that except the information given by the two co-accused persons while in police custody no other evidence is available on record against the petitioner. It is submitted that it is well settled that any information given by the co-accused persons, while in police custody, is not admissible as evidence under the law.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, this third bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Parvatsingh S/o Balwant Singh shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.208/2010 of Police Station Shambhupra, District Chittorgarh provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.