Wahidulla vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

This is repeat (second) application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.02/2011, registered at Police Station-CBN, Indore, District-Neemuch for commission of offence punishable under Sections 8/21/29/31(A) of the NDPS Act,1985.

As per the prosecution case on 20/08/2011 at about 7:30 p.m. upon secret information, that a person named Aadam Khan will be carrying Heroine at Ujjain Bus Stand and if blockage is created, then he can be caught red handed. On the basis of aforesaid information, CBN officials went to the spot and apprehended co-accused-Aadam Khan. Upon interrogation, he disclosed the name of one Gopal and present applicant; and on the basis of which, the applicant has been implicated in the present crime.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in the present crime. No contraband article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant . The applicant has been implicated in the present crime only on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused-Aadam Khan, who has falsely taken the name of the present applicant on account of previous enmity because present applicant refused to marry his daughter with the son of co-accused-Aadam Khan. This fact has also come in the statement of the applicant recorded under Section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 as well as in the statement of other witnesses namely, Anandilal Dangi and Gulsher Khan. The only allegation against the application is that he arranged the alleged contraband article for co-accused-Aadam Khan. The applicant is in custody since 27/10/2017. The investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Conclusion of trial will take sufficiently long time. Co-accused-Chand Khan has already been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 30/07/2019 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 27705/2019 and the case of the applicant is similar to him. There is no possibility of his absconsion or tempering with the evidence. Under these change of circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/CBN opposed the application by contending that the after the alleged incident the applicant was remain absconded for a long time and he was arrested after four years, which clearly shows his involvement in the present crime. Under these circumstances, he prays for rejection of the bail application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, but 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 on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/-(Rupees Three Lacs only) with two solvent sureties of Rs.1,50,000/-each to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C.

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.