LAXMI KOLI BABITA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) P. C. HEARD Counsel for the parties. Rule.

(2.) RULE made returnable forthwith, by consent, Shri gadkari waives service of the notice for the respondents.

(3.) AS short question is raised petitions are taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent. All these petitions can be disposed of by common judgment. The applicant in all the respective petitions had applied to the trial Court for discharge on the ground that he was falsely implicated and inspite of completion of investigation and filing of chargesheet, except the statement of co-accused there is absolutely no evidence against the appliceant (s); nor applicant (s)was arrested along with main accused Zarina on 26th July, 2003, nor there is any incriminating evidence against the applicant (s) and no recovery of any contra-band drug is made from or at the instance of the applicant (s ). The Court below has rejected the applications on the sole basis that contraband drugs certified to be dycetyl morphine was recovered from the possession of the accused Zarina, who was named in the information received by police and involvement of the applicant (s)was prima facie seen as co-conspirator and thus valid and sufficient ground existed to believe that the applicant (s)abetted or entered into criminal conspiracy with other co-accused for illegal possession and sale of heroin. The Court below has observed that the applicants were charged for the offences punishable under Section 21 R/w section 29 of N. D. P. S. Act for which reason they were not entitled for discharge.