Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Aasulal vs Union Of India on 1 September, 2021
Author: Devendra Kachhawaha
Bench: Devendra Kachhawaha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7066/2021
Aasulal S/o Haulal Bishnoi, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Vishnoiyo
Siyagka Bas, Village Kosna, P.S. Pipar City, Dist. Jodhpur. (At
Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Parbatsar).
----Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India through N.C.B.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anand Purohit, Sr. Adv. assisted
by Mr. Kailash Khilery
Ms. Monalisa Purohit
Mr. Raj Singh Bhati
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.R. Pareek, Spl. P.P. for N.C.B.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
Order 01/09/2021 The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No. VIII(IO)12/NCB/JZU/2018, Police Station NCB Jodhpur Regional Unit, registered for the offence under Sections 8/18 of the NDPS Act.
Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner stated that as per page 17 of the charge-sheet, prior secret information was received by the Narcotics Control Bureau, but despite that, no search warrant was obtained by the seizure officer; as per prosecution, (Downloaded on 01/09/2021 at 08:56:23 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7066/2021] alleged contraband was recovered from the bag held by the accused-petitioner; it is an admitted position that notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not given by the seizure officer; statement of Manoj Soguna (Seizure Officer) were recorded as PW-1 and in the said statements he has admitted that no search warrant was obtained because he did not think it necessary and he also admitted that it was not a chance recovery but the recovery was made upon secret information and he also admitted that it is wrong to say that bag was recovered in unclaimed position instead the bag was in the hand of the petitioner-Aasulal; despite that, notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not given by the seizure officer and as decided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Parmanand & Another (2014) 5 SCC 345 that as per para 2 and 9, if the bag is carried by him is searched and his person is also searched, Section 50 applies. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor vehemently and fervently opposed the bail application but does not controvert the fact that seizure was conducted after prior information and contraband was found in the bag of accused-petitioner-Aasulal and notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not given by the seizure officer.
In the above facts and circumstances of the case, when seizure was conducted on the basis of secret information; contraband was found in the bag found in the hand of the petitioner held by the accused-petitioner and notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not given by the seizure officer, therefore, (Downloaded on 01/09/2021 at 08:56:23 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7066/2021] in the opinion of this Court, mandatory provision of Section 50 of the NDPS Act has not been complied with by the seizure officer and further investigation and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.
Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner - Aasulal S/o Haulal Bishnoi, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. VIII(IO)12/NCB/JZU/2018, Police Station NCB Jodhpur Regional Unit, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000/- and two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/-(out of them, one shall be of close relative/family member) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J 5-Ashish/-
(Downloaded on 01/09/2021 at 08:56:23 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)