Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Subhash Kumar S/O Shri Mahadev Prasad vs State Of Rajasthan on 21 October, 2019

Author: Pankaj Bhandari

Bench: Pankaj Bhandari

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 12071/2019

Subhash Kumar S/o              Shri Mahadev Prasad, B/c                Mali R/o
Gudadwas Ps Ramgarh Sethan Dist. Sikar Raj. (At Present
Confined In Dist. Jail Sikar)
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                  ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Kumar Upman with Mr. Rajveer Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Bhadu, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 21/10/2019

1. Petitioner has filed this second bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

2. F.I.R. No.38/2017 was registered at Police Station Sadar, District Sikar for offence under Sections 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act.

3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that statements of Seizure Officer and Malkhana In-charge have been recorded. Both independent witnesses of recovery have turned hostile. It is contended that at the time of inventory, substance was found to be of black colour whereas, as per the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report, the sample which was received, was found to be of brownish green colour.

4. It is also contended that two packets are stated to have been recovered from the petitioner. There was an increase in weight in (Downloaded on 23/10/2019 at 09:32:34 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-12071/2019] one packet by around 570 grams whereas, in the other packet there was a decrease of 746 grams. The samples which were received at FSL were in a dry condition, therefore, there is no question of reduction in weight of the contraband. It is also contended that co-accused has been enlarged on bail and petitioner is not having criminal antecedents of like nature.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the second bail application.

6. I have considered the contentions.

7. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioner, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application.

8. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

9. However, it is made clear that if petitioner repeats the offence, State would be free to move application for cancellation of bail before the concerned Court.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J Simple Kumawat /07 (Downloaded on 23/10/2019 at 09:32:34 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)