Rahul @ Amrit vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Subodh Abhyankar, J

They are heard. Perused the case diary / challan papers.

This is the applicant's first bail application filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as he / she is implicated in connection with Crime No.743/2021 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Mandsaur (MP) for offence punishable under Section 8/18, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The applicant is in custody since 29/06/2022.

Allegation against the applicant is that he was also involved in the aforesaid case wherein 1.5 kg of opium has been seized from the co-accused Pannalal who in his memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act has named the applicant as the person from whom the aforesaid contraband was procured.

Counsel for the applicant has submitted that apart from the aforesaid memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is no other material available on record to connect the applicant with the offence. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, it is submitted that although in the order of the trial Court itself it is mentioned that at crime No.117/2019 registered at PS Chhoti Saddi, Rajasthan, a case under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act has also been registered against him which is incorrect information as the crime No.117/2019 of the aforesaid police station has been registered against some other person under the provisions of Rajasthan Dumrapan Pratishedh Adhiniyam Va Adhumrapani Vyaktiyo Ke Swasthya Adhiniyam, 2000. Its closer report is also placed on record. Hence, it is submitted that the bail application be allowed and he be released on bail.

Counsel for the respondent / State, on the other hand has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that no case for grant of bail is made out as even if no case under the provisions of NDPS has been registered against the applicant, still a case under Section 393, 395, 398 of IPC has also been registered at PS Ringnod, District Ratlam.

Having considered the rival submissions, on perusal of the case diary and taking note of the fact that no other material is available on record against the applicant except a memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act at the instance of the co-accused and the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time, in the considered opinion of this Court, the applicant's application deserves to be allowed on certain strict terms.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(rupees two lakhs) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his/her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial 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) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

I t is also observed that after his/her release on bail, if the applicant is found in any of the criminal activities, the learned Judge of the trial Court shall, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the applicant, be at liberty to cancel this bail order without further reference to this Court; and the State / prosecution will be free to arrest the accused in the present case also.

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

Certified copy as per rules.