Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Prince Singh Son Of Shri Avtar Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 20 May, 2022
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7412/2022
Prince Singh Son Of Shri Avtar Singh, Aged About 22 Years,
Resident Of Kachchhwa Farm, Police Station Karnal Sadar,
District Karnal (Haryana)
(At Present Confined In Sub Jail Bhawani Mandi)
----Accused-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Upman
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Mahla, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
20/05/2022
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner Prince Singh Son of Shri Avtar Singh. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 183/2020 registered at Police Station Bhawanimandi, District Jhalawar for the offence(s) under Sections 8/15, 25, 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. Concisely stated, the facts of the current case are that the police were exhorting people to follow the Covid-19 Lockdown guidelines when a truck was intercepted by them near Zulmi Tiraha, Pipliya. The truck driver, Kamaljeet, stopped the truck at the blockade abruptly and attempted to flee from the place but was caught by one of the officers. The petitioner Prince Singh and one Gurudev Singh were also sitting in the truck. Upon suspicion and after informing the three persons about their right under (Downloaded on 24/12/2022 at 10:21:01 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7412/2022] Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act, the police officers searched the vehicle and gave a shakedown to the three persons. Upon search of the vehicle, a total of 12 packets were found in the vehicle; the 12 packets were emptied upon the tarpaulin of the truck and weighed together as if taken from one single container. The total weight of the admixture was 318 kgs; out of which, two samples of 1 kg each, marked A (chemical sample) and B (control sample), were taken from the seized contraband for investigation and rest of the contraband weighing 316 kgs was re-packed into different packets.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner and that the mandatory provisions of NDPS Act have not been complied with. Thus, the complete recovery as alleged has been vitiated on this count alone. The samples of contraband were not collected individually from the 12 packets for investigation as per the stipulations in the Standing Instruction No.1/88 issued by the N.C.B., New Delhi. As individual weight of all the packets is not known and samples from each of the 12 packets were not drawn for testing, it cannot be said with utmost certainty that each of the packets contained poppy husk and that the quantity of the recovered contraband is 318 kgs. He is behind bars since 16.05.2020.
He further submits that in the present set of facts, the judgment passed by the coordinate bench of this court in Netram v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2014 (1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163, will hold good and that since the twelve bags were not even weighed separately and as the samples were wrongly collected, the quantity of the seized contraband can be assumed to be less than commercial quantity and the impediment as stipulated in (Downloaded on 24/12/2022 at 10:21:01 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7412/2022] Section 37 of the NDPS Act will not be applicable in the present case.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application on the ground that the recovered contraband weighed 318 kgs in total and that is way above the commercial quantity demarcated for poppy husk.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned public prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. Unassailably, the individual weight of the 12 packets has not been taken on record and the possibilities that not all of the packets contained poppy husk cannot be obviated. Thus, it cannot be ascertained beyond any measure of doubt that the recovered contraband was above the commercial quantity. Therefore, the dicta contained in Netram (supra) will be applicable in the present case and the embargo contained in Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act will not be attracted. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the possibility that the trial may take long time to conclude, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner, named above, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.
(FARJAND ALI),J RAJAT KUMAR /66 (Downloaded on 24/12/2022 at 10:21:01 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)