High CourtsSingle Bench

Radhey Shyam vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 8 December 2023 · Citation: (2023) 12 RAJ CK 0028

HON’BLE JUDGES
Farjand Ali, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9597 Of 2023
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

26 paragraphs · 435 words

Farjand Ali, J

1.

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

S.No.

Particulars of the Case

1

FIR Number

16/2018

2

Concerned Police Station

Asop

3

District

Jodhpur Rural

4

Offences alleged in the FIR

8/15 & 25 of the NDPS

5

Offences added, if any

6

Date of passing of impugned order

04.07.2023

2.

It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

3.

Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

4.

I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record and challan papers.

5.

It is a case of recovery of poppy husk weiging 120 kgs 300grms. Two persons namely Bhopal Ram and Dinesh @ Dinaram made their escape good after seeing the police team, however, they were apprehended subsequently. Both have been released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The present petitioner has been booked in this matter on the sole ground that he is registered owner of the vehicle. It is emanating from the record that there is a contention that the petitioner had sold the car to one Bhopal Ram S/o Khammaram, against monitory consideration of 70,000 rupees well before the date of occurrence. There is no other evidence to show that the petitioner was having knowledge regarding illegal transportation of the contraband. In this view of the matter, since the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

6.

Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.