Raju Yadav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is first bail application of the applicant Raju Yadav filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.225/2021 registered at Police Station Khairha, District Shahdol for the offence punishable under Section 8/20, 25 and 29 of NDPS Act.

A s per the prosecution case, on 29.10.2021 on the information of the informant that co-accused Amit Kumar Kewat along with Vikas Jaiswal, Rahul Tiwari, Sunny Diwan, Rahul Singh Parihar, Nikhil Yadav and Rajesh Kacher was coming from Anuppur to village Lakhvariya by Mahindra Scorpio bearing registration No.MP-65-T-0714 and carrying illegal Ganja for illegal sale and that vehicle was being driven by co-accused Rajesh Kachre, ASI Ajay Kumar, P.S. Khaira along with police force went to Bangwar Bypass square, village Karkati and waited from them. At around 6:50 pm he saw a vehicle bearing registration No. MP-65-T-0714 coming from Dhanpuri side. He stopped that vehicle. At that time, co-accused Sunny Diwan, Amit Kumar Kewat, Rahul Tiwari, Vikas Jaiswal and Rahul Singh Parihar were travelling in that vehicle and the vehicle was being driven by co-accused Rajesh Kacher and seized 30 Kg Ganja from that vehicle which was illegally carried by them in that vehicle. On interrogation co-accused Amit Kumar Kewat informed the police that applicant is also involved in the crime. So, police arrested the applicant on 29/04/2022 and since then he is in custody.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the offence. It is alleged that Police seized car bearing registration No. MP-65-T-0714, which belongs to applicant, but from that car no ganja was seized by the Police. There is no direct evidence on record to connect the applicant with the crime. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. Police only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused implicated the applicant with the crime, while the confessional statement to the police cannot be accepted as legal evidence against the applicant in the absence of any other incriminating piece of evidence. Applicant has no criminal past. He has been in custody since 29/04/2022 and conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that the applicant has criminal past. Sufficient evidence is available against the applicant to connect him with the crime. It is further submitted that police seized 30 Kg. ganja from Mahindra Scorpio vehicle bearing registration MP-65T-0714 and applicant was also involved in the crime. So looking to the provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act, he should not be released on bail.

There is no direct evidence on record to connect the applicant with the crime. Police only on the basis of a memorandum of co-accused implicated the applicant with the crime, while the confessional statement of co-accused to the police cannot be accepted as legal evidence against the applicant in the absence of any other incriminating piece of evidence. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. So, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the strength of evidence collected by the Police against the present applicant during investigation of the crime, prima facie it cannot be said that there is a reasonable ground to hold that the applicant has committed any offence punishable under the N.D.P.S. Act and also there is no material to infer that if he is released on bail then he will indulge in the crime punishable under the N.D.P.S. Act. The applicant is in custody since 29/04/2022 and conclusion of the trial will take time, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned C.J.M./trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-

The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

The applicant will cooperate in the trial;

The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

and

The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.

C.C. as per rules.