Vikash vs State Of Rajasthan

The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.338/2017 of Police Station, Hanumangarh Town, District, Hanumangarh for the offences punishable under Sections 8/21, 22, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'the NDPS Act' hereinafter). They have preferred these bail applications under Section 439 CrPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners were arrested on 26.05.2017 with the allegation that they are in possession of 320 vials of Onerex Cough Syrup, containing narcotic substance codeine phosphate.

Learned counsel has submitted that as per the provisions of Section 36A(1)(4) of the NDPS Act read with Section 167(2) CrPC, the police were required to file charge-sheet against the petitioners up to 22.11.2017, however, no charge-sheet was filed on behalf of the prosecution and taking into consideration this fact, the petitioners are entitled to be released on compulsive bail but the trial court has illegally rejected their bail application.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and argued that the accused-petitioner Ratan Kumar did not even file any bail application under Section 36A(1) (4) of the NDPS Act read with Section 167(2) CrPC up to the date of filing of charge-sheet against him on 14.12.2017 and in view of the said fact only, he is not entitled to get the benefit of compulsive bail as claimed by him.

It is further argued that so far as petitioner - Vikash is concerned, admittedly on 22.11.2017 i.e. on the expiry of 180 days from the date of arrest of petitioner-Vikash no bail application under Section 36A(1)(4) of the NDPS Act read with Section 167(2) CrPC was preferred before the trial court, however for the first time, the said application was preferred by him on 14.12.2017 before the trial court, however, on the same day, the police filed the charge-sheet against him.

Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that it is settled that if an accused person, in case where limitation for filing charge-sheet has expired, prefers any application for compulsive bail, the said accused-person is not entitled to be released on bail if the charge-sheet is filed by investigating agency/police on the day when the prayer for compulsive bail is made. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as in the present case the petitioner Vikash filed application seeking conclusive bail only when the police filed charge-sheet, the trial court has rightly rejected his bail application.

Having heard learned counsel for the rival parties, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner-Ratan Kumar did not even move any application with a prayer for releasing him on compulsive bail till filing of the charge-sheet by the police i.e. on 14.12.2017, benefit of compulsive bail cannot be granted to him.

So far as accused-petitioner Vikash is concerned, it is admitted position that on 22.11.2017 when the time prescribed for filing charge-sheet was expired, no application on behalf of him for releasing him on compulsive bail was moved and for the first time, the said bail application was filed on 14.12.2017, when the police had filed charge-sheet against him, I do not find any illegality in the order of the trial court, whereby it has rejected the application for releasing him on compulsive bail.

Hence, both these bail applications are dismissed.