KRISHNADUTT SURESHCHANDRA DUBEY DVIVEDI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application is filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant for regular bail in connection with an FIR being C.R.No.I-11210015210142 of 2021 registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Surat City for the offences under Ss. 8(C), 22(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

(2.) Heard Mr. Zubin Bharda, learned advocate for Mr. Kishan H. Daiya. It is submitted by Mr. Bharda, learned advocate for the applicant that the applicant has been wrongly involved in the offence and applicant is innocent and has not committed such offence. The applicant is arrested wrongly only as he accompanying to the main accused, from whom the muddamal was recovered. It is also submitted that no muddamal is recovered from the applicant. The applicant was accompanying only in the car with the accused and was returning from Mumbai. The applicant is local resident of Surat and not likely to flee away. There is no past antecedent of similar nature of the applicant. It is further submitted that considering the contents of the FIR, papers and the charge-sheet and the nature of allegations, as well as, role attributed to the applicant, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.

(3.) Mr. Kodekar, learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has vehemently opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. It is stated that prima facie case appears against the present applicant. The applicant has accompanied the accused no.1 while coming back to Surat from Mumbai. The applicant has also helped the accused no.4 in transportation of contraband. The contraband is of commercial quantity. The applicant was in contact with the main accused no.4 and if he released on bail, he will involve in similar type of activities and also there are chances that he will give threat to the witnesses.