Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gurwinder Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:42703) on 7 December, 2023
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:42703]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 14035/2023
Gurwinder Singh S/o Sh. Darshan Singh Barad, Aged About 29
Years, Jatsikh R/o Ward No.9, Mohanpura P.s., Sadar,
Sriganganagar, Tehsil And Dist. Sriganganagar
(Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Sriganganagar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Devi Lal Rawla.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vikram Sharma, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
ORDER
07/12/2023 This second application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.402/2022 registered at Police Station Sadar, District Sriganganagar, for offences under Sections 8/15 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per prosecution, huge quantity of contraband (poppy husk/straw) weighing 60 kgs was recovered from a shop, house situated in Ward No.09 of Village Mohanpura, District Sriganganagar. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner was not arrested on the spot, however he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the Court towards the statements of Sandeep Kumar (PW-1) SHO PS Sadar, Sriganganagar, learned counsel submitted that police/investigating agency during the course of (Downloaded on 08/12/2023 at 08:44:26 PM) [2023:RJ-JD:42703] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14035/2023] investigation has not procured any documents indicating that the shop from where huge quantity of contraband was recovered, belongs to the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that in absence of any document indicating that the shop is in the exclusive owner of the present petitioner, he cannot be implicated in the present case.
Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused- petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that looking to the seriousness of accusations against the petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that there are no documents available on record to show that the shop from where contraband was recovered, was in the exclusive possession/ownership of the present petitioner.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case particularly the fact that contraband was recovered from the shop situated in Ward No.09 of Village Mohanpura and the ownership whereof was not ascertained which is evident from the statements of PW-1, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
(Downloaded on 08/12/2023 at 08:44:26 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:42703] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14035/2023] Accordingly, the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Gurwinder Singh S/o Sh. Darshan Singh Barad shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.402/2022 registered at Police Station Sadar, District Sriganganagar, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- 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 so.
It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J /tarun goyal/ Sr.No.13 (Downloaded on 08/12/2023 at 08:44:26 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)