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
6 paragraphs · 235 wordsThe present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.268/2018, Police Station Sadar Hanumangarh, for the offences under Section 8/21, 22,29 NDPS Act & Section 18(c)/27(b)ii of Drugs and Cosmetics Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was neither present on the spot nor any recovery has been made from him. He submits that the charge-sheet in the matter has already been filed. The tablets recovered are not in the commercial quantity. He further submits that the case of the present petitioner is distinguishable from the case of Kailash Sharma and Shish Pal Singh.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the present petitioner has been named by the co-accused persons in the statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Further, there are call details available on record at the relevant point of time between the petitioner and the co-accused persons.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner at this stage.
Accordingly, the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed at this stage.